Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 99

Thread: Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

  1. #51
    Sage
    Barbbtx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    W'Ford TX
    Last Seen
    11-10-12 @ 08:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,467

    Re: Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    The only reason you want her to win the nomination is because it would guarantee Obama his second term.
    He knows it will have to be a very weak candidate to lose to Obama. That's how bad he is.
    I think Palin would be a good president, but I think others could more easily beat him.
    Catawa is my favorite bleeding heart liberal.
    1/27/12

  2. #52
    Bohemian Revolutionary
    Demon of Light's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    03-07-17 @ 12:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,095

    Re: Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    That would be a retarded bet.



    Hearing voices is often a sign of a serious mental disorder.





    And you have the gall to claim you are able to view things rationally.
    You entire evaluation of what I am saying is merely because for you "rational" means "establishment shill" and being anything else makes you crazy or stupid. Do you even acknowledge that the establishment media has a concerted agenda against Ron Paul?
    "For what is Evil but Good-tortured by its own hunger and thirst?"
    - Khalil Gibran

  3. #53
    User
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Paris, France/ LA California
    Last Seen
    11-16-13 @ 07:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    87

    Re: Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Risky Thicket View Post
    Sarah Palin = Kathrine Harris. The GOP will never nominate Palin for president. Don't even think about it. She isn't presidential material. She has next to no experience and even less intelligence. Her major attraction is her message to the masses "I'm as stupid as you are and I can be president." Does that message resonate with a lot of people? Sure, but the people on the upper side of the IQ mean aren't going to vote for her.

    The GOP cannot win a presidential election without support of the mainstream GOP (not Palainistas), without a significant number of crossover voters, Independent voters, on issue voters. Palin doesn't appeal to MOST voters and the GOP is well aware of it. At this point in time there the GOP is having a difficult time finding anyone dynamic and worthy.

    Obama is horrible and as much as I'd like for him to be primaried he won't be. Do you know why? Because the Democrats see a GOP so hosed up it can't find a candidate that won't step on his own johnson coming out of the gate. Think about that - As bad is Obama is, and he's bad, the GOP still can't find anyone who galvanizes most Americans.
    And they said the same thing about Ronald Reagan....

    What i highlighted is a prime example of someone, excuse me for my directness, stupidity. You are just repeating the same talking points that most liberals spew when they really don't know a thing about the woman. Stupid? She is hardly stupid but very intelligent. Her energy experience isn't matched by anyone as of right now, she had a very successful governorship (yes she quit, and guess what, she did more positive in that short time than obama has done his whole political career) and sorry to burst your bubble, majority of Americans actually do share her political beliefs.

  4. #54
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by fbi10 View Post
    And they said the same thing about Ronald Reagan....

    What i highlighted is a prime example of someone, excuse me for my directness, stupidity. You are just repeating the same talking points that most liberals spew when they really don't know a thing about the woman. Stupid? She is hardly stupid but very intelligent. Her energy experience isn't matched by anyone as of right now, she had a very successful governorship (yes she quit, and guess what, she did more positive in that short time than obama has done his whole political career) and sorry to burst your bubble, majority of Americans actually do share her political beliefs.
    Something like 60% of Americans have told pollsters that they'll never vote for her. That's a pretty big hurdle to overcome.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  5. #55
    User
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    06-15-11 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27

    Re: Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

    I read somewhere that Palin is coming out with a documentary about herself titled "The Undefeated." Which I find a bit funny since she did LOSE the 2008 election.

  6. #56
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 05:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,129

    Re: Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by krickitt View Post


    Did you guys see this?? Pretty cool!!

    You think that with all the money invested in putting this together, they could do something about her shrieky voice.....wow.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  7. #57
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Demon of Light View Post
    You entire evaluation of what I am saying is merely because for you "rational" means "establishment shill" and being anything else makes you crazy or stupid.
    Actually, my entire evaluation of what you are saying is because your assesment is not supported by reason or understanding.

    The bet in question is one where, if someone had a lot of confidence in Ron Paul's chances to win but was worried about the chance of losing in the scenario you describe, they could easily hedge the bet by trading off a certain amount of their contracts for a profit when the price increases.

    For example, Ron Paul is trading at about 2.2 (which translates to 22 cents) right now. If he wins the election, it will be worth 100 (which is $10) per "share". Let's say one bets $11 on Ron Paul at 2.2 a share. Then they have 50 shares. If they held each one until Ron Paul wins the election, this would be worth $500. $489 profit on an investment of $11, which ain't too shabby.

    But since you are worried about the unlikely scenario you describe occuring, let's say that you are smart about it and decide to trade off a portion of your shares in order to hedge your bet. Since the current rate is 2.2, a smart time to sell would be when you can sell for 11, or $1.10 per share. Then you can sell off 10 shares of that initial 50 in oredr to recoup your initial investment price of $11 while still holding onto 40 shares which would be worth $400 if Ron Paul won the election.

    Since the unlikely scenario of assasination before he could have his chance at winning the election would only occur if there was a legitimate chance of him winning, the price would certainly exceed 11.0 (or $1.10) well before the theoretical assasination would happen.

    Ergo, your position on this bet is an irrational one. It definitely does not take reason and understanding into account.

    So, like I said, if you were a betting man, you would not be worried about the statistically unlikley event of an assasination.

    However, you would have to consider the statistically greater likelihood of death by natural causes at his age, since that is the only thing that would actually prevent the bet from reaching the point of recapturing the initial investment if he really does have a legitimate shot at winning the election.

    Now, the post that triggered this particular exchange is one that implies that you are not a betting man since you said if you were a betting man. Your reasoning for avoiding the bet actually proves that you aren't a betting man.

    The problem with that statement was that if you were a betting man, you wouldn't be thinking about the bet like you have. You would be thinking about it like I have described above. And you'd be making a profit if your theories are actually correct, even the one about assasination because then you'd sell off all of the shares early in order to get out before the assasination occured.

    See, you were so interested in pretending that I'm arguing from the position of an "establishment shill", you completely missed the fact that I am a betting man and I was actually arguing from the position of a person who is a betting man. If I believed everything that you claim to believe, I'd take that bet in a heartbeat. It would be a smart bet if your beliefs are actually true..





    Do you even acknowledge that the establishment media has a concerted agenda against Ron Paul?
    Concerted? Not really. I think they are biased towards the partisan dichotmy in this country though, which doesn't bode well for people like Ron Paul.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  8. #58
    Bohemian Revolutionary
    Demon of Light's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    03-07-17 @ 12:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,095

    Re: Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Actually, my entire evaluation of what you are saying is because your assesment is not supported by reason or understanding.

    The bet in question is one where, if someone had a lot of confidence in Ron Paul's chances to win but was worried about the chance of losing in the scenario you describe, they could easily hedge the bet by trading off a certain amount of their contracts for a profit when the price increases.

    For example, Ron Paul is trading at about 2.2 (which translates to 22 cents) right now. If he wins the election, it will be worth 100 (which is $10) per "share". Let's say one bets $11 on Ron Paul at 2.2 a share. Then they have 50 shares. If they held each one until Ron Paul wins the election, this would be worth $500. $489 profit on an investment of $11, which ain't too shabby.

    But since you are worried about the unlikely scenario you describe occuring, let's say that you are smart about it and decide to trade off a portion of your shares in order to hedge your bet. Since the current rate is 2.2, a smart time to sell would be when you can sell for 11, or $1.10 per share. Then you can sell off 10 shares of that initial 50 in oredr to recoup your initial investment price of $11 while still holding onto 40 shares which would be worth $400 if Ron Paul won the election.

    Since the unlikely scenario of assasination before he could have his chance at winning the election would only occur if there was a legitimate chance of him winning, the price would certainly exceed 11.0 (or $1.10) well before the theoretical assasination would happen.

    Ergo, your position on this bet is an irrational one. It definitely does not take reason and understanding into account.

    So, like I said, if you were a betting man, you would not be worried about the statistically unlikley event of an assasination.

    However, you would have to consider the statistically greater likelihood of death by natural causes at his age, since that is the only thing that would actually prevent the bet from reaching the point of recapturing the initial investment if he really does have a legitimate shot at winning the election.

    Now, the post that triggered this particular exchange is one that implies that you are not a betting man since you said if you were a betting man. Your reasoning for avoiding the bet actually proves that you aren't a betting man.

    The problem with that statement was that if you were a betting man, you wouldn't be thinking about the bet like you have. You would be thinking about it like I have described above. And you'd be making a profit if your theories are actually correct, even the one about assasination because then you'd sell off all of the shares early in order to get out before the assasination occured.

    See, you were so interested in pretending that I'm arguing from the position of an "establishment shill", you completely missed the fact that I am a betting man and I was actually arguing from the position of a person who is a betting man. If I believed everything that you claim to believe, I'd take that bet in a heartbeat. It would be a smart bet if your beliefs are actually true..
    Hey, whatever it takes to convince yourself that you truly are a free-thinking individual.
    "For what is Evil but Good-tortured by its own hunger and thirst?"
    - Khalil Gibran

  9. #59
    Pragmatic Idealist
    upsideguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. High
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,053

    Re: Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    I think Jeb could come in at number one or two easily. Deep down inside, people cherish the idea of poking at Bush-haters.

    Just the possibility that there could actually be another President Bush is enough to make some extremists lose grip on reality.
    Thinking America would elect another Bush shows that many have already lost their grip on reality... but, hey, they are Republicans, so that goes without saying.

  10. #60
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: Romney, Palin Lead Reduced GOP Field for 2012

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    I think Jeb could come in at number one or two easily. Deep down inside, people cherish the idea of poking at Bush-haters.

    Just the possibility that there could actually be another President Bush is enough to make some extremists lose grip on reality.
    If we had elected Jeb instead of George Jr. back then, we might have a better opinion of the Bush clan today....
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •