I Sat In Amazement Tonight...

[Guest]

...watching the votes roll in in South Carolina. I was particularly intrigued by the various polls that were presented. Polls of those that call themselves religious conservatives had Gingrich winning by something like 2-to-1 over Romney. Those who were evangelicals? The same result. Women who were religious? The same pattern.

I have a tough time understanding why the religious right has chosen a candidate with the morals of an alley cat over another candidate with impeccable character, morals and family life. They chose a candidate whose best explanation of his serial philandering and obviously fractured morality is, "I didn't do it". (Isn't that about the same defense that was used by Herman Cain?)

And people say that Romney's Mormonism isn't an issue? Give me a break.

[Guest]

...watching the votes roll in in South Carolina. I was particularly intrigued by the various polls that were presented. Polls of those that call themselves religious conservatives had Gingrich winning by something like 2-to-1 over Romney. Those who were evangelicals? The same result. Women who were religious? The same pattern.

I have a tough time understanding why the religious right has chosen a candidate with the morals of an alley cat over another candidate with impeccable character, morals and family life. They chose a candidate whose best explanation of his serial philandering and obviously fractured morality is, "I didn't do it". (Isn't that about the same defense that was used by Herman Cain?)

And people say that Romney's Mormonism isn't an issue? Give me a break.

I and others think it was not so much a vote "for" Gingrich as it was a vote "against" the media (CNN and John King in particular) choosing the candidate that will stay and the one(s) that will drop out.

People are outraged at how CNN and King set up that trap as the OPENING of the debate.....featuring ONE candidate and the gossip being spread about him. Not the economy.....not jobs.....not Keystone Pipeline and attempts to develop secure petrol supplies of our own. No, they wanted to talk National Enquirer cover material.

And it backfired. I doubt these voters were that much against Romney. He was leading strongly in the polls before the debate where Gingrich showed what a "street fighter" he can be and that's what is needed to beat Obama's machine.......the machine that defeated the Clinton Machine--prolific.

[Guest]

...watching the votes roll in in South Carolina. I was particularly intrigued by the various polls that were presented. Polls of those that call themselves religious conservatives had Gingrich winning by something like 2-to-1 over Romney. Those who were evangelicals? The same result. Women who were religious? The same pattern.

I have a tough time understanding why the religious right has chosen a candidate with the morals of an alley cat over another candidate with impeccable character, morals and family life. They chose a candidate whose best explanation of his serial philandering and obviously fractured morality is, "I didn't do it". (Isn't that about the same defense that was used by Herman Cain?)

And people say that Romney's Mormonism isn't an issue? Give me a break.

It is my opinion that they will chose the one that talks toughest -- whether they make sense or not. No further thinking is required. The inmates are trying to run the asylum! :ohdear:

[Guest]

Having the R's nominate Newt would be a dream come true for the Dems.

[Guest]

Newt's victory had nothing to do with Romney being a Mormon...it has to do with the vast majority of Americans wanting a conservative leader...Mitt is a good man in many ways, and if he wins the nomination i will certainly vote for him, but while we have a primary opportunity, we are using it to try our best to present a candidate who will uphold conservative principles best...and the old baggage is not going to be as big a problem as dems would have us believe, because people are sick of that kind of nonsense...i prefer Rick Santorum to Newt but am glad that a conservative swept to victory in this important election.

[Guest]

"and the old baggage is not going to be as big a problem as dems would have us believe, because people are sick of that kind of nonsense."

I love statements like this about Newt. Shows a complete lack of reality.

[Guest]

for me it is simple the candidate with the least amount of time in the Washington lifestyle, that has a business background is my choice.

That means only one obvious choice and that is Romney.

I also think it is like trying to measure a passing cloud when folks try to ascertain which candidate is more conservative or not.

btk

[Guest]

Newt's victory had nothing to do with Romney being a Mormon...it has to do with the vast majority of Americans wanting a conservative leader...Mitt is a good man in many ways, and if he wins the nomination i will certainly vote for him, but while we have a primary opportunity, we are using it to try our best to present a candidate who will uphold conservative principles best...and the old baggage is not going to be as big a problem as dems would have us believe, because people are sick of that kind of nonsense...i prefer Rick Santorum to Newt but am glad that a conservative swept to victory in this important election.

Very well said Chachacha. Right on point and right on substance.

[Guest]

"and the old baggage is not going to be as big a problem as dems would have us believe, because people are sick of that kind of nonsense."

I love statements like this about Newt. Shows a complete lack of reality.

The old talking points strategy is failing this time. I pray you liberals keep focusing on the past and never stop.

We who live in the present and will speak the present to the electorate salute you.

We'll see who prevails.

[Guest]

Richie and ChaChaCha, May I please remind you of the article that BTK posted a few days ago that was credited incorrectly to the wrong author? It was regarding the simple math about how President Obama will be re-elected.

Basically;
1. Almost all Black Americans will vote for him.
2. Most college educated women will vote Obama.
3. Liberals will.
4. Democrats will.
5. Most Hispanics will vote for Obama.
6. Union members will.
7. "Big Business" and Hollywood - and their followers will.
8. Most other minorities will vote for Obama.
9. At least half of "Independent" voters will vote for Obama.

If you top this off with a Republican candidate that is seen as an extremist or has lots of baggage - a win is guaranteed for the Democrat party again.

If the candidate is Gingrich, get ready for one of the most mud-slinging campaigns you can imagine. It will work, too.

[Guest]

Richie and ChaChaCha, May I please remind you of the article that BTK posted a few days ago that was credited incorrectly to the wrong author? It was regarding the simple math about how President Obama will be re-elected.

Basically;
1. Almost all Black Americans will vote for him.
2. Most college educated women will vote Obama.
3. Liberals will.
4. Democrats will.
5. Most Hispanics will vote for Obama.
6. Union members will.
7. "Big Business" and Hollywood - and their followers will.
8. Most other minorities will vote for Obama.
9. At least half of "Independent" voters will vote for Obama.

If you top this off with a Republican candidate that is seen as an extremist or has lots of baggage - a win is guaranteed for the Democrat party again.

If the candidate is Gingrich, get ready for one of the most mud-slinging campaigns you can imagine. It will work, too.

Please cite the authority posting these numbers?

[Guest]

Newt's victory had nothing to do with Romney being a Mormon...it has to do with the vast majority of Americans wanting a conservative leader...Mitt is a good man in many ways, and if he wins the nomination i will certainly vote for him, but while we have a primary opportunity, we are using it to try our best to present a candidate who will uphold conservative principles best...and the old baggage is not going to be as big a problem as dems would have us believe, because people are sick of that kind of nonsense...i prefer Rick Santorum to Newt but am glad that a conservative swept to victory in this important election.


:bigbow::bigbow::bigbow:

[Guest]

...watching the votes roll in in South Carolina. I was particularly intrigued by the various polls that were presented. Polls of those that call themselves religious conservatives had Gingrich winning by something like 2-to-1 over Romney. Those who were evangelicals? The same result. Women who were religious? The same pattern.

I have a tough time understanding why the religious right has chosen a candidate with the morals of an alley cat over another candidate with impeccable character, morals and family life. They chose a candidate whose best explanation of his serial philandering and obviously fractured morality is, "I didn't do it". (Isn't that about the same defense that was used by Herman Cain?)

And people say that Romney's Mormonism isn't an issue? Give me a break.

1-Romney/Obamacare; 2-Romney has stated he wouldn't attempt to overturn Roe v Wade...Just the answer from one conservative Christian woman.

[Guest]

Rubicon, I do not need to cite any authority. Take it as the truth or believe what you want with common sense. If you do not care to believe it, it makes no difference to me - but facts are facts.

[Guest]

Rubicon, I do not need to cite any authority. Take it as the truth or believe what you want with common sense. If you do not care to believe it, it makes no difference to me - but facts are facts.

Buggyone...OK I'll trust you.;)

[Guest]

I don't give a rats ass who gets in if it's not obama and he can get this country back to what it was and out of debt and people working

[Guest]

As I was watching some of the speeches and campaigning from South Carolina, the glare from the red necks was almost blinding. Also, the absence of anyone in the audiences who was not caucasian was also apparent.

[Guest]

As I was watching some of the speeches and campaigning from South Carolina, the glare from the red necks was almost blinding. Also, the absence of anyone in the audiences who was not caucasian was also apparent.

Are you nuts? How do you expect anyone to take your posts seriously with this mockery that looks dumber than any "rednecks" or caucasians in SC.

[Guest]

As I was watching some of the speeches and campaigning from South Carolina, the glare from the red necks was almost blinding. Also, the absence of anyone in the audiences who was not caucasian was also apparent.

WOW, I am always amazed at how astute you are. Tell me, how did you know they were red necks? Did they have name tags on like "Hi, I'm Joe and I'm a red neck." or are you psychic? or what?

[Guest]

As I was watching some of the speeches and campaigning from South Carolina, the glare from the red necks was almost blinding. Also, the absence of anyone in the audiences who was not caucasian was also apparent.

Is them thare fax two, buggyone?

Geeze what a post!!

[Guest]

The libs are such hate-mongers. They'll curse you as they sink in their own muck.

[Guest]

It is definitely rare when you can get a serious conversation going with a liberal. More and more, I read these posts and just laugh, because replies are usually pointless anymore. Entertaining tho.