|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jul 1, 2011 22:29:55 GMT -8
Surprise! No URL this time. I am putting forth my prediction, as of this date, of the GOP ticket for 2012. I think it will be Mitt Romney for Prez and Marco Rubio for VP. Actually, I should say that this is what I think would be the strongest ticket for the Republicans. Texas Gov. Perry may get into the race, but I'm not sure he can overtake Romney. Furthermore, I think that he would be slightly less attractive to the electorate as a whole. Not a sure loser in Nov. '12, but perhaps just not strong enough. Rubio is a very attractive candidate for VP. Young, articulate, energetic, Latino, etc. My guess is that he would look very good next to Mr. GaffeCentral, Joe Biden. What would be the chances for a Romney/Rubio ticket? - If the economic situation stays about the same. . . slightly below 50%.
- If the economic situation improves noticeably (meaning a growth rate of at least 4% and an unemployment figure of under 7%). . . 40%.
- If the economic situation gets noticeably worse (meaning a second period of recession and an unemployment figure of 11% or more). . . 55%.
My guess is that the first scenario, or something close to it, will be the case. The election will then be very close and very nasty. Virtually hand-to-hand, possibly with serious irregularities at the polls. A few key states will decide the whole thing, and we may not know the outcome until the next morning. In any event, it's going to be a contact sport, not croquet. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 2, 2011 7:17:41 GMT -8
I think it is way to early to predict who will be where a year from now. The one thing that I think you are guessing wrongly on is the chances of the GOP ticket, no matter who runs, if things stay as they are. In that case, Obama is toast. I also like the idea of Rubio and what he would bring to the table.
My biggest fear? Huntsman getting stronger and running like McCain. He is just not inspiring to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jul 2, 2011 12:48:14 GMT -8
I think it is way to early to predict who will be where a year from now. The one thing that I think you are guessing wrongly on is the chances of the GOP ticket, no matter who runs, if things stay as they are. In that case, Obama is toast. I also like the idea of Rubio and what he would bring to the table. My biggest fear? Huntsman getting stronger and running like McCain. He is just not inspiring to me. I gave a possible Romlney/Rubio ticket a lower probability of victory than you might have done because I am giving great weight to the natural advantage of an inumbent plus what is likely to be really super dirty tactics utilized by the Dems. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 2, 2011 13:04:57 GMT -8
I think it is way to early to predict who will be where a year from now. The one thing that I think you are guessing wrongly on is the chances of the GOP ticket, no matter who runs, if things stay as they are. In that case, Obama is toast. I also like the idea of Rubio and what he would bring to the table. My biggest fear? Huntsman getting stronger and running like McCain. He is just not inspiring to me. I gave a possible Romlney/Rubio ticket a lower probability of victory than you might have done because I am giving great weight to the natural advantage of an inumbent plus what is likely to be really super dirty tactics utilized by the Dems. AzWm Good points! You should never underestimate just how dirty the Dems can get. Maybe more guards at the polls like last time. |
|
|
|
Post by inevitec on Jul 2, 2011 14:02:56 GMT -8
I gave a possible Romlney/Rubio ticket a lower probability of victory than you might have done because I am giving great weight to the natural advantage of an inumbent plus what is likely to be really super dirty tactics utilized by the Dems. AzWm Good points! You should never underestimate just how dirty the Dems can get. Maybe more guards at the polls like last time. I wish we were dirtier. Obama with his let's cooperate crap, leaves me cold. The raw, in your face, application of power is all a conservative understands. They will not cooperate; they will not agree. Really though, with the nominees in your stable, all Democrats have to do is stand mute. You'll pair and nominate Michelle "the good wife" Bachmann and that Texan who wants to secede or choose Newt-patriotism makes me horny and Good an' Pawlenty-or something like that. If we don't split a gut from laughing too much, we will have a reasonable chance to, once again, save ourselves from you all. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Jul 2, 2011 14:15:32 GMT -8
>>>The raw, in your face, application of power is all a conservative understands.<<<
Good luck with that.
I hope they send you.
Nah. They'll hire some jackboots. You can watch on TV.
|
|
|
|
Post by inevitec on Jul 2, 2011 14:26:44 GMT -8
>>>The raw, in your face, application of power is all a conservative understands.<<< Good luck with that. I hope they send you. Nah. They'll hire some jackboots. You can watch on TV. See! I knew you liked me. I just knew.  |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jul 2, 2011 20:19:56 GMT -8
Good points! You should never underestimate just how dirty the Dems can get. Maybe more guards at the polls like last time. I wish we were dirtier. Obama with his let's cooperate crap, leaves me cold. The raw, in your face, application of power is all a conservative understands. They will not cooperate; they will not agree. Really though, with the nominees in your stable, all Democrats have to do is stand mute. You'll pair and nominate Michelle "the good wife" Bachmann and that Texan who wants to secede or choose Newt-patriotism makes me horny and Good an' Pawlenty-or something like that. If we don't split a gut from laughing too much, we will have a reasonable chance to, once again, save ourselves from you all. You cannot be serious! Obama has not cooperated at all. Everything he has done has been designed to gain political advantage. How about inviting Paul Ryan to sit a few feet from the Prez, who proceeds to dump rhetorical crap all over the Wisconsin Representative on national TV? That's not what I call a serious effort to be bi-partisan. If President Obama had really been doing what you say he has done, he might have said something like this. "Tonight we face a serious budget crisis. Something must be done. Rep. Ryan from Wisconsin has made a bold proposal doubtless inspired by his values and beliefs. I'll be candid when I say that I disagree with lots of what's in the Ryan budget, but at the same time I applaud him for having the courage to put forth his proposal. Now it's up to us to see if there are not ways we can meet somewhere in the middle so that this opportunity to get something meaningful done is not lost."Well, did he say that? No, he did not. He trashed Ryan. It's obvious that Obama has no plan, either to balance the budget or to reduce the national debt to a manageable level. In fact the one Obama budget was voted down 97-0 in the Senate, while Ryan's budget was passed in the House. Obama has NO plan to tackle our big budget problems. He has a plan to keep his butt firmly in the seat of power for four more years. His plan is not to propose; it is to attack and smear the Republicans. And, I guess, he hopes like hell that by the time he is 75 years old the economic mess that he is disinclined to do anything about will not be so serious as to render his nice fat Federal pension null and void. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by inevitec on Jul 3, 2011 6:22:01 GMT -8
I wish we were dirtier. Obama with his let's cooperate crap, leaves me cold. The raw, in your face, application of power is all a conservative understands. They will not cooperate; they will not agree. Really though, with the nominees in your stable, all Democrats have to do is stand mute. You'll pair and nominate Michelle "the good wife" Bachmann and that Texan who wants to secede or choose Newt-patriotism makes me horny and Good an' Pawlenty-or something like that. If we don't split a gut from laughing too much, we will have a reasonable chance to, once again, save ourselves from you all. You cannot be serious! Obama has not cooperated at all. Everything he has done has been designed to gain political advantage. How about inviting Paul Ryan to sit a few feet from the Prez, who proceeds to dump rhetorical crap all over the Wisconsin Representative on national TV? That's not what I call a serious effort to be bi-partisan. If President Obama had really been doing what you say he has done, he might have said something like this. "Tonight we face a serious budget crisis. Something must be done. Rep. Ryan from Wisconsin has made a bold proposal doubtless inspired by his values and beliefs. I'll be candid when I say that I disagree with lots of what's in the Ryan budget, but at the same time I applaud him for having the courage to put forth his proposal. Now it's up to us to see if there are not ways we can meet somewhere in the middle so that this opportunity to get something meaningful done is not lost."Well, did he say that? No, he did not. He trashed Ryan. It's obvious that Obama has no plan, either to balance the budget or to reduce the national debt to a manageable level. In fact the one Obama budget was voted down 97-0 in the Senate, while Ryan's budget was passed in the House. Obama has NO plan to tackle our big budget problems. He has a plan to keep his butt firmly in the seat of power for four more years. His plan is not to propose; it is to attack and smear the Republicans. And, I guess, he hopes like hell that by the time he is 75 years old the economic mess that he is disinclined to do anything about will not be so serious as to render his nice fat Federal pension null and void. AzWm The wars and the tax cut that Bush rammed through and our deficit is mostly the current state of the economy. The wars and the tax cuts, which Obama cooperated to extend, (costing him my vote in all likelihood) and the wars are the reason we have a deficit-do you hear me? Republicans created most of the budget deficit. Ryan's plan is worthless. You will not win with it. You conservatives want to cut spending without without addressing revenue. Even Californians agree revenue has to be increased. You have been smoking too much rolled Norquist. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 3, 2011 6:43:38 GMT -8
You cannot be serious! Obama has not cooperated at all. Everything he has done has been designed to gain political advantage. How about inviting Paul Ryan to sit a few feet from the Prez, who proceeds to dump rhetorical crap all over the Wisconsin Representative on national TV? That's not what I call a serious effort to be bi-partisan. If President Obama had really been doing what you say he has done, he might have said something like this. "Tonight we face a serious budget crisis. Something must be done. Rep. Ryan from Wisconsin has made a bold proposal doubtless inspired by his values and beliefs. I'll be candid when I say that I disagree with lots of what's in the Ryan budget, but at the same time I applaud him for having the courage to put forth his proposal. Now it's up to us to see if there are not ways we can meet somewhere in the middle so that this opportunity to get something meaningful done is not lost."Well, did he say that? No, he did not. He trashed Ryan. It's obvious that Obama has no plan, either to balance the budget or to reduce the national debt to a manageable level. In fact the one Obama budget was voted down 97-0 in the Senate, while Ryan's budget was passed in the House. Obama has NO plan to tackle our big budget problems. He has a plan to keep his butt firmly in the seat of power for four more years. His plan is not to propose; it is to attack and smear the Republicans. And, I guess, he hopes like hell that by the time he is 75 years old the economic mess that he is disinclined to do anything about will not be so serious as to render his nice fat Federal pension null and void. AzWm The wars and the tax cut that Bush rammed through and our deficit is mostly the current state of the economy. The wars and the tax cuts, which Obama cooperated to extend, (costing him my vote in all likelihood) and the wars are the reason we have a deficit-do you hear me? Republicans created most of the budget deficit. Ryan's plan is worthless. You will not win with it. You conservatives want to cut spending without without addressing revenue. Even Californians agree revenue has to be increased. You have been smoking too much rolled Norquist. This theme is getting very old and tired. How long must the breathtaking decline in the economy continue before you will say that Obama owns it? Just how has Obama been complicit with any Conservative initiative to get us on the right track again? Never! As usual, you are 100% wrong! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2011 9:59:24 GMT -8
You should never underestimate just how dirty the Dems can get. Maybe more guards at the polls like last time. Of course Karl Rove and his gang never stooped to dirty politics. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 3, 2011 14:40:31 GMT -8
You should never underestimate just how dirty the Dems can get. Maybe more guards at the polls like last time. Of course Karl Rove and his gang never stooped to dirty politics. Nothing like having armed Black Panthers at the polls!  |
|
