birdog1960 Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Ohio Catholics break for Romney. Wait. How can that be? Link maybe obama's play on the contraceptive issue isn't so politically dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) maybe obama's play on the contraceptive issue isn't so politically dumb. Obama's play on the contraception issue was genius, but probably played little role in the Ohio Catholic vote unless turnout of Catholics was through the roof. Edited March 7, 2012 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) Obama's play on the contraception issue was genius, but probably played little role in the Ohio Catholic vote unless turnout of Catholics was through the roof. i agree, it played little role. but those numbers suggest "traditional" catholics are probably a minority, at least in ohio and they may actually support his initiative re contraception Edited March 7, 2012 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 i agree, it played little role. but those numbers suggest "traditional" catholics are probably a minority, at least in ohio and they may actually support his initiative re contraception Which is the problem with the Obama approach. You see, he doesn't care that he is violating the First Amendment. His position, and the position of every liberal dolt who has opined on this topic, is that doing this is okay because a majority of Catholic women don't agree with the Catholic church on this subject. This is about as retarded an argument that you can make, and yet every liberal stands around like a bobblehead, nodding their head and saying "Yes, of course, the problem is not the people. It's the church. Therefore, the church must be made to adhere to the rules of the government. It's embarrassing, and I genuinely hope and believe this will all be thrown out by the Supreme Court right before the November election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Which is the problem with the Obama approach. You see, he doesn't care that he is violating the First Amendment. His position, and the position of every liberal dolt who has opined on this topic, is that doing this is okay because a majority of Catholic women don't agree with the Catholic church on this subject. This is about as retarded an argument that you can make, and yet every liberal stands around like a bobblehead, nodding their head and saying "Yes, of course, the problem is not the people. It's the church. Therefore, the church must be made to adhere to the rules of the government. It's embarrassing, and I genuinely hope and believe this will all be thrown out by the Supreme Court right before the November election. Which in itself is a fine exercise in logic acrobatics, since they have no compunction arguing that public opinion on mandated healthcare be damned, as the illuminati know better than the great unwashed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Which in itself is a fine exercise in logic acrobatics, since they have no compunction arguing that public opinion on mandated healthcare be damned, as the illuminati know better than the great unwashed. This is precisely the kind of thinking you'll never see posed to the Wasserman-Shultz's of the world. It would make her head implode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 You should hope that come election night, "Lifetime" goes off the air so all you liberal guys aren't stuck in your beanbags sipping white wine while comparing your poneytails to each other. The real men will slip out between frames after rolling a strike and cast their ballot while you will be still worrying if you folded your wife's laundry the right way for her. Now 3rdnlng, you are going to hurt their feelings with your harsh, harsh words. I truly feel that you need to be more sensitive about issues which you discuss. The again, maybe you should be viscious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 But in 2008 you had two candidates who were going to get 100% support from their base and they weren't gearing up to run against an incumbent. Plus, Obama diffused any issue by making it clear Hillary would play a role in his cabinet. That certainly won't happen for Santorum. Romney has enough sense not to put Santorum anywhere near the White House. He should appoint him Ambassador to The Vatican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 DCTom and DiN in a retard fight? You wish. DCTom might be an **** but he has circled you about 1800 times in anticipation of eating your children. Please, you stay with Tom, the day you ever defend me is the day I know I have gone senile. You two are a cute couple People have (conveniently) short memories. It was no less contentious in 2008, and Hilly eventually withdrew from the race on June 7th. Romney should have the nom sewn up well before that date. The Dem race was between two cadidates that could win, the GOP race is between one that could win and a whole bunch of kooks with no chance. There is a big difference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 The Dem race was between two cadidates that could win, the GOP race is between one that can win and a whole bunch of kooks with no chance. There is a big difference Holy Crap! I actually agree with you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 Holy Crap! I actually agree with you Oh, I'm sure we probably agree on a lot of things, politics aside Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Please, you stay with Tom, the day you ever defend me is the day I know I have gone senile. You two are a cute couple The Dem race was between two cadidates that could win, the GOP race is between one that could win and a whole bunch of kooks with no chance. There is a big difference If it had been between McCain and Hillary, McCain would have won. And while I agree that Romney is the only guy who could win the nom AND the general election out of the bunch, the prevailing sentiment is that Paul could win the general election, although he'd never get the Repub nom. But if Romney were to offer him a cabinet position, say in November... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janicks Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 A bit myopic aren't we? You don't think that a sitting President who's running unopposed and not locking up 90%+ of the primary voters is big news. Isn't the fact that a conservative right to lifer got more votes in a Democratic primary deserve mention in news stories? I like, the majority of the population do not live in the bipolar world that you immediately jump to. But its not big news. Obama has no serious democratic challenger so the Democratic primary is simply a formality and thus it gets exactly the coverage it deserves, namely none. The fact that Obama only got 57% of the primary vote in Oklahoma (57% of roughly 100000 votes) in a state in which he got trounced in 2008, and will again get trounced in 2012 is merely trivia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Please, you stay with Tom, the day you ever defend me is the day I know I have gone senile. You two are a cute couple The Dem race was between two cadidates that could win, the GOP race is between one that could win and a whole bunch of kooks with no chance. There is a big difference I actually agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 [/b] I actually agree with you. So do I, although he is completely wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts