• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Newt's Out

cpwill

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
75,679
Reaction score
39,936
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
FOX News Sunday, I'm watching the evening rerun of the morning show. He's talking about his campaign in the past tense and talking about how he wants to help Romney beat Obama.



but ti doesn't seem like he's Officially Out...... weird
 
cpwill said:
FOX News Sunday, I'm watching the evening rerun of the morning show. He's talking about his campaign in the past tense and talking about how he wants to help Romney beat Obama.



but ti doesn't seem like he's Officially Out...... weird
Click to expand...

Another one bites the dust!

But I am actually glad that he dropped out because he has no real chance of winning anything like Santorum and Paul. If Romney was smart, he would propose a "super crew" of the people in the primary using their strong points as proposed cabinet members and advisors. That would create a single candidate that pleases all voters in a sense. Either way my support goes to Obama over Flippity Flopper
 
I think you are right for Romney to go ahead and start assembling a Shadow Government. The problem being it can't be too open - just overt. Otherwise you increase risk at the same rate that you increase ability.
 
cpwill said:
I think you are right for Romney to go ahead and start assembling a Shadow Government. The problem being it can't be too open - just overt. Otherwise you increase risk at the same rate that you increase ability.
Click to expand...

Youre right, he should not parade it around like a trophy wife, but he needs to show a plan. A man without a plan is no man that I want in charge. I believe that was something that was really attractive about Obama. Although his goals were impossible and highly idealistic, he had a plan.
 
this is all too funny,and the republican party chooses romney to support knowing he really cant win against obama,its all just a game of selecting the team player,or should i say the establishment player.obama proved to be a member of the establishment more than bush jr was,and romney so far looks like he will do or say anything he needs to for success.

its just so sad when our election will come down to a vote between bush 3 and bush 4.the republican party has done a good job of burying all the non team players except santorum and paul,santorum is just a matter of time before he quits,and paul wont back down,hes fine with losing as long as his message is heard.
 
cpwill said:
I think you are right for Romney to go ahead and start assembling a Shadow Government. The problem being it can't be too open - just overt. Otherwise you increase risk at the same rate that you increase ability.
Click to expand...

I've always been curious about this, it would seem like a good campaign strategy for candidates even while the primary is still going on, heck even while there is more than one viable candidate possibility, to start arranging potential cabinets. Just like most people talk about the VP selection mostly being about who can bring in votes, which not come out and say "I've picked so and so to my Secretary of Defense, or Energy, or whatever." Pick positions in charge of things that people care about, it could make a candidate look more Presidential and would bring more names to the ticket if someone isn't entirely enthusiastic about a candidate, ie Romney, they may support him anyway because they like who his SecDef will be.

Personally I would not like such a system because it would politicize these offices which are supposed to be about merit and ability, not who'll draw in the most votes, but I can't see why its not being done. I suspect it has something to do with the internal workings of the Party, as gruesome as primaries are they don't want to draw in more people to be damaged in the fight, or perhaps they don't want even more division in the party.

I can hardly imagine its out of respect for the positions in question.
 
TheLastIndependent said:
Youre right, he should not parade it around like a trophy wife, but he needs to show a plan. A man without a plan is no man that I want in charge. I believe that was something that was really attractive about Obama. Although his goals were impossible and highly idealistic, he had a plan.
Click to expand...

cgjmcgm.jpg

as we can see he does indeed need a plan unless he is going to go the kerry route of hes bad im good vote for me because im not him!!!!i have a plan,but you have to vote for me to find out what it is!!!!!!!!!

actually looking back its no surprise bush won,being a dumb president he was still the smarter of two evils:shock:
 
beerftw said:
View attachment 67125548

as we can see he does indeed need a plan unless he is going to go the kerry route of hes bad im good vote for me because im not him!!!!i have a plan,but you have to vote for me to find out what it is!!!!!!!!!

actually looking back its no surprise bush won,being a dumb president he was still the smarter of two evils:shock:
Click to expand...
Im gonna kick my ass for saying this, but Bush was a better choice in both elections. The dems put up absolutely horrible candidates.
 
TheLastIndependent said:
Youre right, he should not parade it around like a trophy wife, but he needs to show a plan. A man without a plan is no man that I want in charge. I believe that was something that was really attractive about Obama. Although his goals were impossible and highly idealistic, he had a plan.
Click to expand...

really? you thought he had a plan? he turned everything over to Congress. He didn't have plans, he had ideas.
 
TheLastIndependent said:
Im gonna kick my ass for saying this, but Bush was a better choice in both elections. The dems put up absolutely horrible candidates.
Click to expand...

i agree kerry was a joke and gore was a robot,if i could go back i might reconsider gore,but no guarantees he would get my vote,kerry definately wouldnt get my vote,he was a joke.
 
cpwill said:
really? you thought he had a plan? he turned everything over to Congress. He didn't have plans, he had ideas.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. But he presented them as a broad plan of change. It gave the people a sense that he had a plan even if he didnt.
 
beerftw said:
this is all too funny,and the republican party chooses romney to support knowing he really cant win against obama,its all just a game of selecting the team player,or should i say the establishment player.obama proved to be a member of the establishment more than bush jr was,and romney so far looks like he will do or say anything he needs to for success.

its just so sad when our election will come down to a vote between bush 3 and bush 4.the republican party has done a good job of burying all the non team players except santorum and paul,santorum is just a matter of time before he quits,and paul wont back down,hes fine with losing as long as his message is heard.
Click to expand...

I'm going to have to disagree with you on your bush statement. Much of what made bush bush was his foreign policy and religious stance. From what we know of Obama and what we can infer from Mitts past both off them are different enough for that comparison to fail both.

I'm hoping to see an actual plan from Romney. I'm not likely to vote for him regardless, but I want to know what the options actually are before finalizing my decision.

This post was made from my phone.please excuse spelling mistakes
 
xpiher said:
I'm going to have to disagree with you on your bush statement. Much of what made bush bush was his foreign policy and religious stance. From what we know of Obama and what we can infer from Mitts past both off them are different enough for that comparison to fail both.

I'm hoping to see an actual plan from Romney. I'm not likely to vote for him regardless, but I want to know what the options actually are before finalizing my decision.

This post was made from my phone.please excuse spelling mistakes
Click to expand...

you put bush and obama side by side i cant tell the difference other than bush refused apologies and obama attacked sovereign nations like pakistan and screwed up our foreign relations in the one country we actually needed to leave afghanistan.
 
Last edited:
Wiseone said:
I've always been curious about this, it would seem like a good campaign strategy for candidates even while the primary is still going on, heck even while there is more than one viable candidate possibility, to start arranging potential cabinets. Just like most people talk about the VP selection mostly being about who can bring in votes, which not come out and say "I've picked so and so to my Secretary of Defense, or Energy, or whatever." Pick positions in charge of things that people care about, it could make a candidate look more Presidential and would bring more names to the ticket if someone isn't entirely enthusiastic about a candidate, ie Romney, they may support him anyway because they like who his SecDef will be.

Personally I would not like such a system because it would politicize these offices which are supposed to be about merit and ability, not who'll draw in the most votes, but I can't see why its not being done. I suspect it has something to do with the internal workings of the Party, as gruesome as primaries are they don't want to draw in more people to be damaged in the fight, or perhaps they don't want even more division in the party.

I can hardly imagine its out of respect for the positions in question.
Click to expand...

I think it may have more to do with that political decisions are so tenuous nowadays that nobody wants to count their chickens before they're hatched.

Another is that many Cabinet appointees tend to come from the House or the Senate, and they don't want to lose an election because they might be appointed to the Cabinet, especially if their Presidential candidate doesn't win.
 
I think he said he'd stay in to keep the debate focused to conservative ideals.
Or something like that.
 
beerftw said:
you put bush and obama side by side i cant tell the difference other than bush refused apologies and obama attacked sovereign nations like pakistan and screwed up our foreign relations in the one country we actually needed to leave afghanistan.
Click to expand...
Obama's diplomacy is completely different than bush's. The only similarity is use of drones which is fine by me (until I learn new info on how its done which I will). And the whole Pakistan thing was just as complicated under Bush. IMO, Obama's risk with Pakistan was justified and one that bush didn't take. what really messed up our relations with Pakistan was the CIA operative getting caught.

This post was made from my phone.please excuse spelling mistakes
 
xpiher said:
Obama's diplomacy is completely different than bush's. The only similarity is use of drones which is fine by me (until I learn new info on how its done which I will). And the whole Pakistan thing was just as complicated under Bush. IMO, Obama's risk with Pakistan was justified and one that bush didn't take. what really messed up our relations with Pakistan was the CIA operative getting caught.

This post was made from my phone.please excuse spelling mistakes
Click to expand...

bush avoided pakistan,much for good reason.bush knew that we would need pakistan whereas obama ran in 08 on the promise of attacking pakistan,bush knew it was our exit strategy out of afghanistan,so bush being as stupid as he was thought a little farther ahead than obama.
 
cpwill said:
FOX News Sunday, I'm watching the evening rerun of the morning show. He's talking about his campaign in the past tense and talking about how he wants to help Romney beat Obama.
but ti doesn't seem like he's Officially Out...... weird
Click to expand...

He doesn't want to get out before Santorum because then all of his votes will go to him.
 
cpwill said:
FOX News Sunday, I'm watching the evening rerun of the morning show. He's talking about his campaign in the past tense and talking about how he wants to help Romney beat Obama.



but ti doesn't seem like he's Officially Out...... weird
Click to expand...

I'm sure he'll officially withdraw very soon, since this statement has helped hinder his campaign.

And he has to pay back $5 million to those who invested in him. Lot of money.

His fat cheating ass couldn't run if his life depended on it anyway.
 
Josie said:
He doesn't want to get out before Santorum because then all of his votes will go to him.
Click to expand...

Ordinarily, I would dismiss this sort of egomania. In Newts case, I agree.
 
usda select said:
Ordinarily, I would dismiss this sort of egomania. In Newts case, I agree.
Click to expand...

newt is a dumbass,santorum count beat romney if he pushed religious values but didnt force them down peoples throats.

statistics show women are the evangelical right,but vote more left,this is a field where evangelicals could win if they pushed less control on abortion and more on family values.
 
beerftw said:
this is all too funny,and the republican party chooses romney to support knowing he really cant win against obama,
Click to expand...

No comment, just wanted to quote this sort of prediction for future reference.


As to the OP. Good. Now maybe santorum will get a clue as well and quit wasting time and money.
 
beerftw said:
newt is a dumbass,santorum count beat romney if he pushed religious values but didnt force them down peoples throats.

statistics show women are the evangelical right,but vote more left,this is a field where evangelicals could win if they pushed less control on abortion and more on family values.
Click to expand...

Lol... Newt is far from dumb but he sure is stupid. And Santorum is too off base with his views to get elected passed primaries. Non-religious people will fear his basis of religion. Hell, I fear his basis on religion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom