http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ial_election/iowa/2012_iowa_republican_caucus The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Iowa Republican caucus-goers shows Gingrich with 32% followed by former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney at 19%. Georgia businessman Herman Cain, who led in Iowa last month, drops to third with 13% of the vote. Texas Congressman Ron Paul draws 10% of the vote in Iowa, while Texas Governor Rick Perry and Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann each grab six percent (6%).
You are being ridiculous. First of all, I haven't heard Barney Frank's words. Secondly, all I said was "You think they paid him $1.6 million for a history lesson?" If that's Barney Frank's every word, then Barney talks a lot less than I would have guessed. barfo
It's a barfoism. When things start to be indefensible he changes the direction of the thread. It's classic debate tactics.
As for Newt, he may be the most conservative and strongest candidate, but I think his personal life will turn many people off. He also seems to shoot too much from the hip and says things that just aren't true. I like him, but I doubt he'd be very electable.
You aren't even in the ballpark of reality here. I've got nothing to defend in this thread, nor was I attempting to change the direction of the thread. If anyone did that, it's Denny with his rant about Barney Frank. ABM said he was still considering all his choices, and I said, essentially, yeah, with those choices, I'd be careful too. Hardly a major diversion. I suppose you could say I was trying to broaden the discussion from just Newt to all the candidates, but even that is kind of a stretch, since ABM's message already implied consideration of all the candidates. For ABM: it was just my way of saying, man, your list of candidates sucks, what a bunch of losers. Although I think I put it more poetically the first time. barfo
Yes, but that's because he's copying me. I'm so tired of him getting his talking points from me. barfo
I fully admit I haven't followed the Rise of Newt here, but wasn't he "dead" after the straw polls? Something like he'd stopped campaigning, his staff quit, he was out of money, getting 1% of the polls, etc? What happened? It does go to show you that the Brian Hypothesis of Presidential Prognostication is still valid...in February or March there will be 2 or 3 candidates with a shot, one of whom we're not even talking about right now...and the breathless 24/7 coverage of the "race" is taking away from the real issues. For instance, Bachmann is a US Congresswoman. What kind of legislation is she pushing to make the country better right now? What kind of committee work? Is she pushing budget proposals to the SuperCommittee? Or is she talking to cameras? How much gover-nating is Perry doing? What DOES Romney do nowadays?
The latter. I believe I read she hasn't even cast a vote since her vote against increasing the debt ceiling back in August. Even before that, she was a singularly inconsequential congressperson. Perry: no one has any reason to care outside of Texas (and Texans apparently are willing to accept absolutely anyone as governor). Romney: Running for President has been his full-time job for the last six or seven years. barfo
“Officials familiar with his work at Freddie Mac say that his role had nothing to do with lectures in history and everything to do with building relationships with Republicans on Capitol Hill. I have to ask you, isn’t that lobbying?” “He was clearly there as a lobbyist, and slipped and acknowledged that you don’t enhance your academic credentials by serving as Speaker, you enhance your value as a lobbyist,” Frank said.
The way I've read it, this is the issue. ABM started the thread hoping to glean some knowledge from all of you intelligent folks. Instead he received responses like the above. In other words instead of posting "a bunch of losers" maybe explain why this is so.
