UConn James Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) NYT So Newt's first narrative about Romney is that he's a soft debater who won't be able to go toe-to-toe with Obama, but now he's saying that Romney is a bully? Which is it? In the first 15 minutes, Newt had his ass handed to him. No witty comeback when faced with the fact that he was a de facto lobbyist for Fannie/Freddie and others. Now, because an audience couldn't cover for him and waste time because they had to sit on their hands, Newt's threatening to skip the remaining debates. (Not to mention that there were several times where the audience did clap at responses. Just, they had nothing to clap at for Newt.) This is pathetic, Mr. Speaker. If you can't debate on the rostrum without the peanut gallery egging you on, distracting from the proceedings and wasting airtime, then you have no business being up there. Andrea Saul, a Romney spokesperson, rightly resurrected this picture out of the archives. http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/sites/default/files/styles/blog_listing_full/public/Aj7_NTXCIAAeLvr.jpg Edited January 24, 2012 by UConn James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 NYT So Newt's first narrative about Romney is that he's a soft debater who won't be able to go toe-to-toe with Obama, but now he's saying that Romney is a bully? Which is it? In the first 15 minutes, Newt had his ass handed to him. No witty comeback when faced with the fact that he was a de facto lobbyist for Fannie/Freddie and others. Now, because an audience couldn't cover for him and waste time because they had to sit on their hands, Newt's threatening to skip the remaining debates. (Not to mention that there were several times where the audience did clap at responses. Just, they had nothing to clap at for Newt.) This is pathetic, Mr. Speaker. If you can't debate on the rostrum without the peanut gallery egging you on, distracting from the proceedings and wasting airtime, then you have no business being up there. Andrea Saul, a Romney spokesperson, rightly resurrected this picture out of the archives. http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/sites/default/files/styles/blog_listing_full/public/Aj7_NTXCIAAeLvr.jpg That is some funny stuff! This is probably the most fascinating primary season, either party, than I can ever remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 What a little kitty, waaaaaaaa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 That is some funny stuff! This is probably the most fascinating primary season, either party, than I can ever remember. 1984. In the wake of the Soviet shoot-down of KAL 007. Gary Hart, Walter Mondale, John Glenn, and the Czech airliner question. Good times, good times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 That is some funny stuff! This is probably the most fascinating primary season, either party, than I can ever remember. yeah I've been surprised at where some of the shots have been coming from, first FOX seemed to taking some shots at Gingrich. Is this Bloomberg taking a shot at Romney? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UTeRXLPk3g Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) 1984. In the wake of the Soviet shoot-down of KAL 007. Gary Hart, Walter Mondale, John Glenn, and the Czech airliner question. Good times, good times. Ahh, yes Gary Hart...Donna Rice...Geraldine Ferraro (later on). I almost forgot about that. What made that one a little different, you knew, whoever got the nod was going to get slaughtered in the presidential election...nothing is so certain in 2012. I suspect, when the dust settles, Buddy Roemer will be the pachydermal presidential choice. Seriously...if I was voting for a Republican, I would seriously have to consider Rick Santorum, after this primary...I don't like the guy one bit, personally, but I think he is probably the one Republican candidate that you have a sense you know who you are votiing for. That isn't necessarily a bad thing. Edited January 24, 2012 by Buftex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 I guess it wasn't too difficult for Romney to convince his board room buddies who control NBC to clamp down on the Republican audience. I thought this was America? Romney, Mr. "quiet room" himself hates the average voter since he can't begin to connect with them. This is really pathetic, silencing voters from showing their support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 If the debate audience was filled with undecided voters, then allowing for clapping or booing would be acceptable. But these debates are filled with partisan supporters of the various candidates who will cheer their choice and boo the others regardless of what they say. So in that situation it just wastes time and gives the viewing audience a false impression of who's giving the best argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted January 26, 2012 Author Share Posted January 26, 2012 NYT piece This guy is saying that allowing applause for primary debates makes for more interesting television, and yet the lines that draw the attention the most: But Mr. Gingrich’s response raised another question altogether: Does the roar of an exercised crowd distract from the real and weighty task at hand — selecting the best candidate for president — by encouraging candidates to play for applause lines? “There was a debate in New Hampshire in which they said be polite, no cheering, no booing, and nobody minded,” said Gwen Ifill, the PBS correspondent and moderator of two vice presidential debates. In fact, the protocol for the general election debates, which are overseen by the Commission on Presidential Debates, is that audiences sit in virtual silence or risk being escorted out. Since Newt demands an audience reaction to prime his pump and provide a laugh-track-like leading for viewers, he will fall just as flat in the general election debates as he did the other night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Wow! did you guys here pieces of Newt's stump tirade today? Dude went on an incoherent, diatribed rant today. Newt Unhinged! I predict tonite is gonna get really nasty tonite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 Wow! did you guys here pieces of Newt's stump tirade today? Dude went on an incoherent, diatribed rant today. Newt Unhinged! I predict tonite is gonna get really nasty tonite. There has been an amazing assault on his value and credibility lately. Check out Drudge and look at all the articles. The latest one is Bob Dole. I suspect the Republicans see him as a bomb-thrower, and if they can help Romney lock up Florida, the Gingrich rise will official go the way of Bachman and Cain, and Romney can focus on the general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 26, 2012 Share Posted January 26, 2012 (edited) There has been an amazing assault on his value and credibility lately. Check out Drudge and look at all the articles. The latest one is Bob Dole. I suspect the Republicans see him as a bomb-thrower, and if they can help Romney lock up Florida, the Gingrich rise will official go the way of Bachman and Cain, and Romney can focus on the general. Oh yeah, they know whats up, they know who the real Gingrich is much better than the general public. They worked with this guy, they know how erratic, egomaniacal, self-absorbed, delusional (I'm sure I'm missing a bunch of other adjectives) and unpredictable he is. They also realize that the ultimate liberal wet dream for this upcoming election cycle is a Newt vs Obama matchup. You see Larry Sabato's crystal ball prediction? Gingrich getting crushed and Mitt up slightly over Obama, and Larry Sabato is the best in the business. Think about this, this is with conservatives still not nearly coalescing around Mitt yet, wait until we get to July, and the Obama machine is applying their full court left wing press, conservatives are gonna be so outraged, that they'd vote ANYONE into office other than Obama, which means in the swing states, Mitt's numbers could be better than what we are seeing today. Btw, 5 out of the last 6 polls have Romney beating Obama in Florida, and in each o those polls, the best Gingrich does against Obama is down by 7. Yeah, that's the best he has. Also, anyone happen to catch Nancy's complete turnaround today? She pretty much said the Newt case is case closed. Hmmmmm, yeah, I can tell you what happened there, the Obama team called her up and said "What the !@#$ are you thinking??? Don't you see that we have attack ads against Romney in Florida? Don't you know this is who we are attacking, this is who we hope loses in FLorida? Knock it off!" Edited January 26, 2012 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Oh yeah, they know whats up, they know who the real Gingrich is much better than the general public. They worked with this guy, they know how erratic, egomaniacal, self-absorbed, delusional (I'm sure I'm missing a bunch of other adjectives) and unpredictable he is. They also realize that the ultimate liberal wet dream for this upcoming election cycle is a Newt vs Obama matchup. It's as simple as this: Mitt will bring the independents, and the conservatives will take him over Obama. The conservatives will take Newt over Obama, but he can't bring the independents. I like Ann Coulter (much in the way Detroit Lion fans like Ndamukong Suh), and even she is on the warpath against Newt. This came out today. And probably the death knell for Newt in Florida has been Rubio telling him to knock off the ads and fly right. Romney/Rubio = Time to start working on the Barack Obama Library. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Mitt was ready for Newt, and he finally gave the type of answers he needed against charges against his wealth, investments and taxes. He finally looked comfortable in his own skin. My guess is that he wins Florida by at least 5 points, barring no unforseen unforced errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wisconsin Bills Fan Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Mitt was ready for Newt, and he finally gave the type of answers he needed against charges against his wealth, investments and taxes. He finally looked comfortable in his own skin. My guess is that he wins Florida by at least 5 points, barring no unforseen unforced errors. Finally Romney came to his senses and said he was proud of his success. Only the left-wing nuts are going to hold his wealth against him, and they will be voting for Oblahblah no matter what. This election needs to be about the failure that is Obama, he didn't live up to his hype and needs to work on his golf game full time. I agree Romney/Rubio 2012 and the BHO is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 lol but no one's allowed to ask questions about Newt's sordid past because of course that would be "disgusting and offensive" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juror#8 Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Finally Romney came to his senses and said he was proud of his success. Only the left-wing nuts are going to hold his wealth against him, and they will be voting for Oblahblah no matter what. This election needs to be about the failure that is Obama, he didn't live up to his hype and needs to work on his golf game full time. I agree Romney/Rubio 2012 and the BHO is done. It's that simple huh? Cute. There has been an amazing assault on his value and credibility lately. Check out Drudge and look at all the articles. The latest one is Bob Dole. I suspect the Republicans see him as a bomb-thrower, and if they can help Romney lock up Florida, the Gingrich rise will official go the way of Bachman and Cain, and Romney can focus on the general. Was reading some conservo-blog stuffs yesterday. What is up with the bucket? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 (edited) I'm not saying this to gloat.... But the look on Newt's face and the awkward pause after Romney said, "Have you checked your own finances? You have investments in Fannie and Freddie." (To go along with the prior statement that Romney's finances are in a blind trust (I believe it's been in this since he became governor), meaning he exerts no control over how the trustee invests them. Newt can't say the same.) Newt didn't know whether to stevestojan or go blind, so he split the difference, closed one eye and cut a fart. Regardless, Santorum made a great point that this source/amount of personal income stuff is a total distraction to the real issues that are before us. I get that when a candidate gets attacked on something like this, s/he pretty much has to respond; Romney has said that he was successful in business, lives off the dividends, pays all the taxes he owes on all of these monies, gives a sizable portion to charities, and it's the height of stupidity for a fellow Republican to ask him to apologize for any of this. We've established these facts. Everyone knows them, just like everyone knows Newt cheats on and divorces his wives. It's time to drop this as a main discussion point. BTW --- What's everyone doing in 2020? Who wants to live on Newt's Moon Colony / the 51st state? Gingrich on Wednesday laid out an extensive plan to have a permanent U.S. base on the moon by the end of his second term as president. He said that once 13,000 Americans were living on the moon, the colony could apply for statehood. The promise could appeal to Florida's space industry, which has struggled since NASA ended the U.S. shuttle program in 2011. Really, dude? Really? Bribe (with public money) for votes much? Edited January 27, 2012 by UConn James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 (edited) I'm not saying this to gloat.... But the look on Newt's face and the awkward pause after Romney said, "Have you checked your own finances? You have investments in Fannie and Freddie." (To go along with the prior statement that Romney's finances are in a blind trust (I believe it's been in this since he became governor), meaning he exerts no control over how the trustee invests them. Newt can't say the same.) Newt didn't know whether to stevestojan or go blind, so he split the difference, closed one eye and cut a fart. Regardless, Santorum made a great point that this source/amount of personal income stuff is a total distraction to the real issues that are before us. I get that when a candidate gets attacked on something like this, s/he pretty much has to respond; Romney has said that he was successful in business, lives off the dividends, pays all the taxes he owes on all of these monies, gives a sizable portion to charities, and it's the height of stupidity for a fellow Republican to ask him to apologize for any of this. We've established these facts. Everyone knows them, just like everyone knows Newt cheats on and divorces his wives. It's time to drop this as a main discussion point. BTW --- What's everyone doing in 2020? Who wants to live on Newt's Moon Colony / the 51st state? Really, dude? Really? Bribe (with public money) for votes much? Although I think Newt is clinically insane and has a Pelosi level incoherence, I am willing to admit even crazy people stumble on to partially good ideas sometimes. The moon place will be expensive and difficult but I like the idea of shipping people there. Personally I'd say 13,000 Americans would be missed, but I think the world can act on this together and send about 34,108,752 people there. At least that was the number in 2010. Use Google and you can figure out what I mean. Edited January 27, 2012 by ieatcrayonz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share Posted January 27, 2012 (edited) On the whole, exploring the cosmos with unmanned vehicles and satellites is probably the most efficient use of $ at this point in time, combined with more research on technology that would make extra-planetary living easier (i.e. travel/transport of materials by supermagnet 'elevator,' artificial gravity, etc. We're still at a stage where a spacewalk and changing a camera on a satellite is a Big Deal, cost a ton of money and which almost went awry because of one stuck bolt. What does it profit to colonize the moon for what everyone knows would cost many times that estimate? What would we do there? What's the purpose? I don't mind the boldness of it so much, but especially considering that we don't have a commissioned shuttle to do manned travel into space at present, the timeframe is in no way realistic. And then again, there's the $ thing where we're already $1.2T in the hole annually. We have a hard enough time with life on earth.... (BTW, when moon statehood occurs, would we get to rename Congress the "Intergalactic Council"?) Edited January 27, 2012 by UConn James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts