Is a vote for Romney another vote for Karl Rove?
 

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/09/karl-rove-gop-craig-unger?mbid=social_twitter

Interesting article. I had no idea Rove was still so entrenched in politics and is essentially the man behind Romney.

And Rove doesn't like Willard any more than anyone else does.

Rove knows Mitt is a big turd.

If Romney picks Paul Ryan I think he'll win and it won't matter if he's a turd or not.

A vote for Romney is a vote for Obama. A vote for Obama is a vote for Romney.

This "man" is so smackable...

http://media.salon.com/2012/07/karl_...ct-460x307.jpg

Yes we know the food stamp line is bigger than it's ever been.
Your point is?

Most people hate Ryan even more than Mittens, so I hope he DOES pick him.

It will guarantee a GOP loss in November. :thumbsup

This is a seriously important election. How anyone could vote for WILLARD ROMNEY is a mystery to me.

I don't think that's entirely accurate.
Most democrats hate Ryan more than Romney, sure, but I would argue that most conservatives like Ryan more than Romney.

There's more than two sides to this political bullshit.
You may hate Romney and Ryan and that's fine but there's a larger section of the population that thinks your an idiot without knowing you. And they vote too so we'll see.

You think McCain would have let all those people that lost their job under Bush starve?

Has Rove decided to go behind Romeny?? Cheers dude for sharing for such 'hot' link.................chill....

Ryan might be a good pick for Romney. He could help him win Wisconsin which Romney desperately needs if he is going to win the election and he fits the theme of focusing on the economy.

He is a lightning rod of sorts for the left so you know Obama will attack him and likely try to make him out as one of the guys who helped destroy the economy in the first place.

In the end, VP candidates rarely have much positive impact beyond delivering their home state, but as we saw with Palin they can hurt you.

Picking Ryan won't guarantee Romney a victory, he still has a huge, almost overwhelming uphill battle ahead of him.

What makes you think Obama is such a great president? He has taken more freedom away, and put us in a bigger debt than any other president in history.

Edit: The only people who actually like Obama care, have no idea what it really is.

Conservatives and libertarians are already going to vote for Romney anyway, so wouldn't you want to find a candidate that pulls in the independents? Mitt will need a lot more than Ryan to win.

Anyone who thinks Romney can win is misinformed. The mainstream media keeps saying the race is close but the fact is if you look at the electoral vote break down Obama is running away with it. He has well over a 100 electoral vote lead over Romney.

It kind of reminds me of the 2008 election when they talked about how close it was and Obama thrashed McCain. Yes, the polls show that it is close in the popular vote, but, like you say, when you look at the electoral vote breakdown Obama is kicking his ass.

the guy that runs fivethirtyeight.com is a statistician and does a ton of work with polling. He has been pretty much dead on in the last few elections. Right now he has the odds at Obama 75% chance to win and Romney 25% chance to win.

The only way I can see that changing is if something major happens to Obama in a negative way or somehow Romney can pull off a miracle.

The media wants to make it seem closer than it likely will be because it gives them plenty to talk about and get ratings with.

why would a libertarian vote for Romney?

What freedoms have you lost?

And can you point us to any links from an impartial source that shows that Obama has in fact "put us in a bigger debt than any other president in history."

Looks like Obama is doing fine, all while facing solid obstruction from the right at every turn...

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...43445807_n.jpg

Here is a good site that shows the national debt with a little perspective.

If you base it on percentage growth then Obama has grown the debt by about the same amount as Reagan did in his first three years in office.

If you scroll down a little you can see a chart where they show the amount of change in the debt by presidency. Here we see that during Reagan's two terms he increased the amount of the debt by 168%. Obama on the other hand, so far, has increased the debt by about 37%.

Here are some other notables on the list:

Carter +36%
Bush +49%
Clinton +22%
GW Bush +75%


So technically speaking Obama has us in the most debt we have ever been in if you are talking about a dollar amount, but as of right now he has increased the debt less than Reagan and both Bushes.

The funny thing is, when you look at the chart you see every president since 1976 (which is as far back as this goes) has left office with the national debt being at a new all time high.

This page shows the national debt as a % of the GDP going back to 1929.

Roosevelt ins the biggest debt creator during the depression. Obama is second right now and GW Bush is third.

Make sure to look at the part where the graph splits after Carter. The green line shows what the debt would have been had Reagan and the Bushes balanced their budgets and the democrats did as they did.

http://www.freedomworks.org/files/im...on_chart_0.png

http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_ht...ifts-dates.jpg

Romney says he agrees with the Ryan budget plan.

How does the Ryan plan reduce the deficit again?

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/05/ryans-budget-spin/

Is Guantanamo still open?

You're going to be on the ballot?

Did Obama approve a 4 year extension of expiring provisions of the Patriot Act? Yes, he did.

Obama is far from perfect. He's pissed off lots of liberals regarding plenty of issues, but they also know McCain would have been worse, and they know Romney would be worse too, so Obama is still going to get their votes.

The only difference is if McCain had extended the Patriot Act (for example) the left would have gone nuts. Same with the extension of the Bush tax cuts, but because Obama is a Democrat the opposition is not as vocal.

The outcome would have been the same, at a minumum.

Obama has presented one Republican plan after another, but in a concerted effort to defeat Obama, the right decided on day one, to oppose everything and anything Obama wanted, even when the Republicans used to want the very same things.

If a Republican was proposing the very same plans, the righties would be all for it, and the Dems would be outraged.

In reality, the Republicans get more of what they want under Democratic presidents, than they ever could or would get, under a Republican president. It's all pretty laughable.

Obama was Bush 2.0 and Romney would be Obama 2.0. That makes Romney Bush 3.0. The Republican and Democratic parties are 1 big party. They are 1 and the same. They are 1 big party with 2 presidential candidates instead of 1.

One of the major problems is that both parties' primary interest is making sure that they can defeat the other party in the next election. If Romney wins the odds are that the democrats will still hold the senate so they will likely not work with him and we will be stuck with another 4 years of stagnant government. If Obama wins the republicans will likely still hold the house and will not work with him.

Even, as we have seen, if one party controls all three houses the minority party threaten filibuster on everything in an effort to make sure that nothing gets done.

I don't see an end to much of any of this until one party gains control of all three, decides to do some stuff that is actually good for the country then when the other party threatens filibuster they call their bluff and force them to carry out their threats.

You already know the answer to this, don't even know why you're asking to be honest.

Most Libertarians are closer aligned with Republicans than Democrats, and in the General Election will choose the Republican in order to keep the Democrat from winning. Depending on which state you live in, there's a good chance Libertarians are voting for Romney instead of Gary Johnson.

So did anybody read the article? Funny how Rove, who had to resign, is now controlling things again by controlling the most money.

They say people have short memories but I pray people don't have memories that are that short or we'll probably get Jeb in '16 or '20.

The solution is to vote for a 3rd party.

That will never happen with the way things are structured now. It is a two party system and it is in the interest off too many parties to keep it that way.

I don't even think its a Republican and Democrat thing. Karl Rove is his own weapon of mass destruction and a liability to all.

People have no memory when it comes to politics.

Just a few months ago during the primaries Romney was asked if all the attacks the republicans were carrying out against each other would harm the eventual winner in the general election. Romney said it was kind of like a etch-a-sketch and you could just shake it up and start over. He was savaged by his opponents for that, but he was right. It is like people just forgot about that stuff. During the primary he was way behind Obama in the polls, once it was clear he was the nominee suddenly he was almost even with him.

Another example is the undecided voters. You hear about people who are undecided right up until the day of the election. How the fuck can that be? You can't escape the election. hell, I can't see how someone could still be undecided today. We have had Obama for 3+ years. You either think he has done a good/decent job or not. You also can easily decide if you want him to have another four years. If you don't want him to have another four years then your decision is pretty much made. How out of touch with the world around you do you have to be for it to be election day and you still be undecided?

How anyone could spend even a micro-second considering voting for Obama is a mystery to me... Hope and Change = Bait and Switch. He lies. He deceives. He will without hesitation tell you whatever he thinks you want to hear to win an election. This is what he did in 2008, and he's doubling down on this tactic in 2012. Try getting past the fact that he's black, young, seemingly hip and cool and examining what this clown has done in 4 years. The country has a deficit of $16 trillion... its biggest in history. Nearly 23 million people either unemployed or seriously under-employed. A GDP that is flat-lining at 1.5%. He is without a doubt the worst U.S. president in history substantially. A vote for Obama is a vote for further annilation of the U.S. economy... this should be very, very obvious to anyone who possesses even the slightest amount of intelligence.

You do remember what happened in 2008 and know how long a recession typically lasts, especially when its the worst ever, right?

He got ObamaCare done, he ended DADT and he did a lot of other things, but they were two of the reasons I voted for him.

Reagan and GWB also had the two largest deficits in history at the time, too.

How do you figure that? :error

Wrong.

Me, too. Mitt SUX. Even his own people hate him.

Dude. That's MITT!!!! :eek7

That SOB flips more than a crackhouse mattress.

No. What should be very, very obvious is that:

1. We are in a worldwide recession.

2. The GOP has done everything they can to sabotage this economy, and this president. They have used the filibuster an unprecedented number of times. They won't EVEN DEBATE Obama's jobs bills. They are the party of "NO".

This country was in fine shape when Bill Clinton left office. The Rethugs stole the White House and everything WENT TO SHIT!! Recession. Needless war. Warrant-less wiretapping. Torture. Unemployment. Wall street crash. Record deficit. Housing bubble bust.

Now people do nothing but blame Obama for not cleaning up Bush's mess fast enough!

So they want Bush 2.0 - Mittens.

Gary Johnson is polling around 6%. So I would say most libertarians are voting for Johnson.

In Colorado there is good evidence that Obama is losing support to Johnson.

Obama was Bush 2.0.

Using Obama's logic that he inherited the economy. Bill Clinton is responsible for the first 4 years of the Bush's economy. Clinton's best years where when he took office and it declined from there. So Clinton's first 4 years were Bush 1's economy.

The endless war, torture etc were all happening under Clinton. The news just didn't report it. Did you know that Clinton dropped more bombs on Iraq than Bush 1? Did you know the war with Iraq escalated under Clinton?

Warrant-less searches, wire tapping, etc was passed BIPARTISAN-LY. The patriot act passed 100-0. The Iraq authorization was pushed using Clinton era data and passed with majority support from the democrats.

Republicans and Democrats really are the same party.

the only poll that matters

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 43%. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided.

The president enjoyed a bounce immediately following release of last week’s job report. However, the bounce has faded, and the race is back to where it was just before Friday’s report. See tracking history. Following that jobs report, consumer confidence fell to a new 2012 low yesterday and is barely above that low today. Just 24% believe the jobs market has improved over the past year, while 44% believe it has gotten worse.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll

Rasumessen is notorious for skewing republican for a few reasons. http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp201...rasmussen.html

The only thing that matters is the electoral college where Romney is currently getting his ass handed to him.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

That's exactly right. We don't have one big election. We have 50 small ones. National polls mean very little. And yes, Willard ain't doing well in swing states, and with some critical voting demographics.

Fuck Mitt, the little rich tax cheat.

Exactly what freedoms have you lost under Obama?

Without all of the spending we would be in a depression right now.

The real problem is a Republican congress that won't raise taxes on the wealthy. There is a severe shortage of currency in day-to-day circulation with the top 400 households in the US now holding 60% of the nation's wealth. The only way to redistribute that money is to tax those people at an extremely high rate (such as France's planned 75% upper bracket tax rate) or wait for them to die and get them with the death tax.

It's looking like Obama and the Republican congress will both be re-elected, which means 4 more years of a stalemate and absolutely nothing getting done. If Romney pulls it off, you can bet on that 60% figure going up even more and adding years onto our recovery time.

GOP? You STILL think there's a difference between parties?
Get help.

No wonder the globalists want us dead

.

I think not.

Most everyone within 10 years of retirement age, and everybody past it, will vote to keep their Social Security benefits and that would mean voting Democratic.

That's a whole lot of voters.

No way Romney picks Ryan.