dayman

Tell me you weren't one of the maniacs voting for "Tea Party Rubio" when he ran against Crist as a madman.

As a Floridian good for Charlie. He was torpedoed by the anti-moderate GOP push to take over our state. And it isn't local money either. We are a naturally red state and that's fine. But we aren't this brand of Red, and Crist was ousted and everyone in Florida knows why and how and by who and how most of us like what we have now. !@#$ the Florida Tea Party plain and simple. Nobody in this state gives a !@#$ about Rubio and Scott is a piece of disastrous **** who would cut of his nose to spite all of Floridian's faces. This state's GOP is coming back to the middle or we're going purple even in state elections. I like this op-ed. I like what it means for our state. And say what you want about Bill Nelson but you would think he's the damn devil if you watch tv and live where I live. Meanwhile...nothing from his side. No superpack in the tank for him. Every commercial break is a superpack add against him, the others are grandma's talking about kids moving back in their homes b/c Obama killed America.

They're both bad NFL QBs it's that simple. At least TJ can be a bad QB in a normalish system. Tebow can only be a bad QB in a dumbed down 1950s system. Tebow is a great guy, great college QB, strong work ethic and possibly a good leader in certain locker rooms...but he's dumb as a brick has a slow release is not accurate and can't play NFL QB. Jackson.

One thing we could have is more athletic LBs. Draft delusions aside...we could have that. That said we wouldn't have a better starting 4 DL than we do now.

!@#$ Walter

I really had a better impression of TJ than you guys maybe I'm wrong? Why do you all think he's so terrible?

Bring back subtitles!

Hehe I have to admit Trump has done it again...rumors he'll "fire" an Obama impersonator at the convention. Obviously a minor sideshow but I will laugh I have to admit. Also if I was Romney I would do more quasi-racist things as a campaign I heard one guy on the radio make a point I agree w/.....small swing voter base in this election as many have said but you can still turn some people on that otherwise might not be and nothing turns on potential conservative voters like knowing liberals hate you...internal Mitt discussions are more politically in-tune than me but they must at least be having this debate...if they think it can work a bit and increase base enthusiasm in what most think is a turn-out election they'll have no choice but to do it. This isn't McCain.

hehe I stand by my original thesis here...once again not predicting a Biden slam dunk or even a "win" (if there is such thing) but a better performance than you all are assuming...he's a goofball and probably a bit retarded and certainly a liability in the hypersensitive media world out there .... but he's capable of making it through a VP debate that nobody cares about ... total prediction nobody can know the future and it's certainly buying low even to make this statement but here I am making it. More importantly I can't stress enough that nobody will care in the end. The politics of the moment distract us but Biden can walk on stage and do a little debate w/ out throwing a bomb either way...and even more true is that Ryan can't possibly walk out on stage at a VP debate and throw a meaningful bomb b/c after all it's a VP debate. And even given that it doesn't matter I still can't stress enough...Biden can do it well enough. There's all kinds of stuff (certainly now) people can use to call him goofy and he is...but there is a long career of stuff that can be shown that he can handle this VP debate don't be so caught up in faux-hype against Biden or for Ryan. I'm no here calling Biden great (God forbid) but let's not get out of hand. And also...I'm not attacking Ryan in this post but the boy-genius man love isn't something that I would just bank on translating into reality both politically or even in terms of governing genius (I know that is devil speak to you guys)...hype all around that means nothing Ryan will be Ryan and Biden won't be a caveman and nobody will care in the end b/c it's VP debate.

LOL only on PPP

hehe, no need I get it I don't stop looking up just b/c I post again when it's quick posting...and like I said I respect both Clinton and Bush (W) but it's easy to be a "statesman" when you have 2 terms and are retired from politics I'm mainly thinking about those still involved be it in government or still active/could be in government soon...most people who know anything about W know his aids contribution is probably the most of any president and the Clinton intuitive and even Haiti efforts w/ both Bush's were noble etc...but generally speaking I'm leaning towards wondering about current active politicians or possible future players who really can be seen as statesman in the moment (no just presidents btw) EDIT: Actually oddly enough while controversial I think Hillary could qualify somewhat btw...now that I think about it...not on some ultra high level but her stock is high

Perhaps Jeb could be on the list. He's not the greatest of federal choices but I certainly (being a Floridian) would take him back in a heartbeat over Scott and honestly think he would stand a better chance at beating Obama than Romney. Anyone that has read a few of my posts know I like Clinton but we need not discuss that if you disagree I'm mainly searching for people I don't think about that I may see as a statesman. Jeb I think may qualify, I just think of him as local I guess.

And btw also while I guess we could broaden the discussion to those "active" but not necessarily holding office (which would disqualify both Bush POTUS's...)...keep in mind "statesman" includes not just "I think this guy is patriotic" but that he's widely respected and most people hold that view (as well as him being somewhat wise/competent). I for instance do like W personally and while his presidency evolved into a disaster I'm not as hard on him as others...he couldn't qualify as a statesman...you don't need everybody to agree but at least most must agree on the subject. Obviously not many would dispute H.W. as a statesman (even those who don't like him) he's not active he's old and sick.

EDIT: Active in politics today

Just curious...I'll maybe add some but don't have any now but just wondering...who does the board consider a modern day "statesman." Obviously tough to ask this question in an election year (let alone presidential election year) but the general thesis is that there aren't any.

I hate polls but if polls can be trusted at all (and as much as I hate them they can be taken just w/ the "grain of salt" they need) .... he could still win by a blowout and win a close election. Today's blowout is not your 1984 blowout...this is 2012 America. That said it will impossible to know until we see if the debates give Mitt some lasting "juice" for the "common folk" to get behind.

I'm not saying he'll "win" the debate but this won't happen. As goofy as it is to say this in this moment in time...you underestimate Biden.

Some sort of groundswell dug it up it's trending right now. "Drink Guinness" lol...yes sir

Holy !@#$ing **** how hard am I looking forward to that Lincoln movie. Spielberg directs Day-Lewis (God of all actors ever) as Lincoln? It's basically everything I want to watch rolled into one movie.

hehe...specifics not as important as the general attitude. It was funny. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZO2jIR8hc4&list=FLJcAGGviXfI58PvYeu1JWdA&feature=mh_lolz EDIT: new to me but apparently this is old so I failed I admit it hehe

I didn't know that good correction. Having a we built that night the first night is much more reasonable politically probably even changes my opinion on the entire thing. Ultimately the whole thing needs to be about Romney when the lights go on for the gut of the presentation, Romney the man/life story, what makes him tick, who he is, sell him etc...if they get everybody riled up the first night and shift probably be a success. EDIT: BTW if Obama loses ultimately the entire thing will have been lost from before he sworn in when Rahm insisted on including predictions of the unemployment rates in the middle of a **** storm (which they missed by a long shot) in the political sell of the stimulus instead of focusing on the delta (which they got almost exactly right)

Hehe, assuming TC pasted the quote from somewhere .... talk about fast a loose with the exclamation points. I heard the speech on Sirius in the car and that exclamation point is classic print journalism. Anyway Romney isn't a birther he's just going to use every knife he has to show anyone and everyone he will stab Obama with everything he's got and is out to win. Many in his own faction dislike him in reality so if they don't think he is playing to win and can win it would get ugly. Romney has no choice but to blow certain dog whistles. You can hate the party for it, but it's not fair to say Romney is a birther b/c of it.

Hmmm...well in my more than slightly buzzed state it's hard to say. It's a good question though...and I don't have an answer tonight probably won't give it much thought at this point no point. My criticism of making it the actual slogan has nothing to do with using it, it's obvious ammo and they don't deserve to be in politics to not continue it...but to theme the convention around it seems a bit shallow for some reason. It just seems to me to merge the anti-Obama partisan political attacks (legitimate of course this is politics) too much into the genuine message of the party platform 2012. I mean...it just seems...reactionary and political and sort of petty and as an overall convention theme you would think there would be something better...something more authentically GOPish that is somehow all-encompassing of their vision. It seems like it will work with the base obviously but it really does rely on the Obama gaffe/truism however you see it. Obviously w/ out that it wouldn't be the tag line I mean on it's own "we built this" is asinine if viewed on an island it really just makes it seem like the entire deal is reactionary. I feel like I would obviously play it up in the convention and campaigning but I would want a sort of...rock (so to speak) out there that was simply "GOP"...a base that was somehow removed from politics a bit more than this and dealt more with the vision maybe synergistic w/ the Ryan pick and a general philosophy I'm selling... I get that this will do that to an extent...but it's already out there...it's sort of toxic in that it riles up both bases the left gets nuts about it for obvious reasons and the line has hooked who it hooks already. It just seems weak. I mean the GOP convention is now themed "we built this?" It just doesn't seem to really do much in the way of furthering the "official introduction to the masses" while at the same time is just furthering the existing opposition effort to counter. Ultimately I think it really is marginalizing the ability of the whole line of attack to be used effectively in the future it's going to become a meme (more than it is now)

Heavily buzzed I would say. I'm never drunk....unless I'm really really drunk This isn't true anymore IMO. It's up for debate and it certainly was true some time ago, but I think it's an antiquated political outlook. At least in this election.

Hehe as if I pretend to be middle of the road. LA is retarded I'm glad you enjoy his presence. He really provokes great "discussion" he's a real great person to talk with, I mean that btw...if I were repeating nonsense from my little circle of influence and wanted periodically have LA ramble about nothing around the periphery talking at the internet and with nobody he really would be a pleasure.