Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 50
  1. #1

    Default Campaigner in chief

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...y.html?hpid=z5

    Obama is at 191 fundraisers in his first term. That is more fundraisers than all of the Presidents from Carter forward, combined.

    The post partisan President.......hope and change.


  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    Obama is at 191 fundraisers in his first term. That is more fundraisers than all of the Presidents from Carter forward, combined.
    And Obama's reelection strategy is working very well against the holier-than-thou Mitt Romney and his Republican Party supporters.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Karl Rove’s Electoral Map Shows Obama With A Solid Lead Over Romney

    Karl Rove‘s out with the first installment of his 2012 electoral map. And as of now, he’s not painting a pretty picture for Mitt Romney.





    As seen in the map, votes solidly for President Obama or “leaning Obama” add up to 284 — versus Romney’s total of 172. That leaves 82 as a toss-up. As it stands, it obviously shows Romney lagging behind significantly. As Brett LoGiurato points out over at Business Insider (emphasis his): “According to this map, even if Romney wins all the toss-up states of Iowa, Missouri, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida — which could be done — he still wouldn’t beat Obama.”

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    That is more fundraisers than all of the Presidents from Carter forward, combined.
    I get where yer comin' from BGA, but this ain't the same world anymore. Particularly since the "Corporations are People Too" ruling (copyright Mitch Ram-me). I don't know how to do it (save it, S2), but we need to get the money out of running for office. Otherwise, now, more than ever, you need to play the game. Or you will lose. It's not even a question. It takes massive amounts of money to compete. Isn't that correct?

  4. #4

    Default

    Broke- You could be right. We shall see. Just remember that the undecideds in every election other than Bush - Kerry- break heavily for the challenger. If Obama can obscure the facts and get people lost in his new term "forward" like he did with "hope and change". Then he will win. If Romney can keep a focus on Obama's record and present a simple ivable alternative- Obama is toast.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GopherJake View Post
    I get where yer comin' from BGA, but this ain't the same world anymore. Particularly since the "Corporations are People Too" ruling (copyright Mitch Ram-me). I don't know how to do it (save it, S2), but we need to get the money out of running for office. Otherwise, now, more than ever, you need to play the game. Or you will lose. It's not even a question. It takes massive amounts of money to compete. Isn't that correct?
    Looks like you are starting to figure out that smaller government would be nice- eh Jake? You can't buy power if there is none to be had. We all have to learn this to varying degrees.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Right behind you
    Posts
    11,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...y.html?hpid=z5

    Obama is at 191 fundraisers in his first term. That is more fundraisers than all of the Presidents from Carter forward, combined.

    The post partisan President.......hope and change.
    Obama has his fundraisers and Bush had his vacations/golf...a lot of vacations and golf.
    Aloha Mr. Hand

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    Looks like you are starting to figure out that smaller government would be nice- eh Jake? You can't buy power if there is none to be had. We all have to learn this to varying degrees.
    Doesn't England have strict rules about campaigning and $$$ in campaigns? If so, why can't we do that? What I am saying doesn't have to do with size of government. It has to do with $$$ used in campaigning. I get that your and S2's argument is that they go hand-in-hand. But if England can do it, why can't we (they do, right?)? It's not as if they are Hong Kong over there.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...y.html?hpid=z5

    Obama is at 191 fundraisers in his first term. That is more fundraisers than all of the Presidents from Carter forward, combined.

    The post partisan President.......hope and change.
    If you were facing a billion dollars of opposition money, much of which doesn't legally need to be reported, what would you do, beej? Try answering it without referencing Soros and Gore. They aren't players, as you know.

    Thanks to SCOTUS, the rules are different than 2008. Your post is disengenuous.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jamiche View Post
    If you were facing a billion dollars of opposition money, much of which doesn't legally need to be reported, what would you do, beej? Try answering it without referencing Soros and Gore. They aren't players, as you know.

    Thanks to SCOTUS, the rules are different than 2008. Your post is disengenuous.
    Your post is disengenuous. Obama way outspent Mccain. And he will way outspend Romney. And he's using taxpayer dollars as well. There is no defense on this one Jammer.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tikited View Post
    Obama has his fundraisers and Bush had his vacations/golf...a lot of vacations and golf.
    Bush stopped golfing in '03 because he felt it was wrong since we are at war. I really don't like defending Bush because I don't care for him, but this is a ridiculous comeback. Obama has been golfing way more than Bush.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GopherJake View Post
    Doesn't England have strict rules about campaigning and $$$ in campaigns? If so, why can't we do that? What I am saying doesn't have to do with size of government. It has to do with $$$ used in campaigning. I get that your and S2's argument is that they go hand-in-hand. But if England can do it, why can't we (they do, right?)? It's not as if they are Hong Kong over there.
    No, England is not very different. All has to be declared. Corporations can contribute.

    http://news.sky.com/home/politics/article/16196151

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tikited View Post
    Obama has his fundraisers and Bush had his vacations/golf...a lot of vacations and golf.
    I LIKE IKE.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    Your post is disengenuous. Obama way outspent Mccain. And he will way outspend Romney. And he's using taxpayer dollars as well. There is no defense on this one Jammer.
    Counting the PAC and SPAC money the repubs are projected to have a $300M edge in the prez race. Why do you have such an obsession with Obama, beej? It's unhealthy. Try writing about something else for a week. Or just take a week off. Death will be here to stick up for deuce.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Right behind you
    Posts
    11,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    Bush stopped golfing in '03 because he felt it was wrong since we are at war. I really don't like defending Bush because I don't care for him, but this is a ridiculous comeback. Obama has been golfing way more than Bush.
    So the majority of his first term doesn't count? O.k.
    Aloha Mr. Hand

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    Bush stopped golfing in '03 because he felt it was wrong since we are at war. I really don't like defending Bush because I don't care for him, but this is a ridiculous comeback. Obama has been golfing way more than Bush.
    He did stop playing golf but he spent a lot of time at the ranch. It's irrelevant anyway because presidents are never on vacation. The presidency travels to the golf course, the Texas ranch, Martha's Vineyard, Hawaii, Camp David, etc. The nuclear codes, the infrastructure and the political apparatus are always with the president.

Posting Permissions

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