Author Topic: Obama vs Romney  (Read 70547 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #100 on: April 18, 2012, 06:50:01 AM »
I'll be voting for Obama...


...and there's nothing you can do about it.



When you go to the polling place w tears of joy voting for the messiah just remember that some ignorant, racist, regressive, guido, dago, homophobic, gun totting, teabagging, greedy, wop is canceling out your vote.   

Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #101 on: April 18, 2012, 07:04:16 AM »
Actually, it's pretty tough to keep up because my girl is over today and we've been having quite a bit of sex. (This is a real girl, not one that I created so people would think I was cool on the internet.)

Also, I have something called 'a job'.

Try Googling that one as it's a pretty abstract idea and I don't have time to break it down for you right now.



I think you're the first person in the history of the human race to have sex!

How much is that little Chinese prostie costing you, "stud"?











By the way, people who brag about having sex on the internet aren't usually having it. Hope this helps.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #102 on: April 18, 2012, 09:40:34 AM »

garebear

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 6491
  • Never question my instincts.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #103 on: April 18, 2012, 05:56:22 PM »
When you go to the polling place w tears of joy voting for the messiah just remember that some ignorant, racist, regressive, guido, dago, homophobic, gun totting, teabagging, greedy, wop is canceling out your vote.   
Are you referring to yourself?

I seriously doubt you vote, seeing as how it invlolves leaving the house and all.

G

garebear

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 6491
  • Never question my instincts.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #104 on: April 18, 2012, 05:57:58 PM »
I think you're the first person in the history of the human race to have sex!

How much is that little Chinese prostie costing you, "stud"?











By the way, people who brag about having sex on the internet aren't usually having it. Hope this helps.
No prostitutes. It was a great day.

Been getting a lot of pussy here lately.

Have fun listening to Rush and posting hate on the internet. Don't forget to defend your bigot friends today.
G

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #105 on: April 18, 2012, 06:36:00 PM »
40-state sweep
April 16, 2012 by Don Surber

Two years ago today, I predicted a 51-seat gain in the House of Representatives for the Republican Party. At the time, experts gave Democrats better than even odds of maintaining the House. Given that they had a 76-seat advantage — Republicans would need to flip 39 seats to take the House — that seemed reasonable. To be sure, most voters wanted the newly enacted Obamacare repealed, but experts said voters would get over that by November, when the economy picked up.

I was wrong. Republicans had a net gain of 63 seats in the biggest rout in 60+ years.

A 40-state sweep for Mitt Romney harkens only to Reagan’s victories in 1980 and 1984, but it will do.

I base my prediction on several factors:

1. Mitt Romney did well in all the Republican primaries in blue states. This shows he has organized Republicans in those states, even though they are small in number. Judging by my experience in West Virginia, they tend to be just as conservative as the Republicans elsewhere — it is tougher to be a minority than a majority — but they are pragmatic.

2. Mitt Romney should put New England in play. Boston dominates that section of the country and the people in that area know him. He’s the Mormon Kennedy to them. He does not smoke or drink. Ah, there’s a religion that the Kennedy clan should consider.

3. Barack Obama is running scared. 4 years ago, he was a blank slate. Today his blackboard is filled with a lot of action and little results. The $787 billion stimulus did nothing. The $700 billion TARP went into bankers pockets. The GM bailout affected only 1 in 5 Americans who actually buy a GM or Chrysler. The Arab Spring backfired. He gave up on Iraq and we are being tossed out of Afghanistan.

4. Obamacare. Never has a presidential domestic policy been so despised. The Vietnam War was more popular in 1968 — and LBJ decided against another term.

The 2012 election will not be about whether Ann Romney worked a day in her life or Rush Limbaugh calling a woman a slut or whether George Zimmerman is guilty of murder in the second degree.

The 2012 election is all about Barack Obama. For such a vain narcissist, Barack Obama sure is trying to get out of the spotlight on this one. That shows how little chance he really has.

My 2010 prediction.


http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/54259


MM2K

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1401
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #106 on: April 18, 2012, 08:50:04 PM »
40-state sweep
April 16, 2012 by Don Surber

Two years ago today, I predicted a 51-seat gain in the House of Representatives for the Republican Party. At the time, experts gave Democrats better than even odds of maintaining the House. Given that they had a 76-seat advantage — Republicans would need to flip 39 seats to take the House — that seemed reasonable. To be sure, most voters wanted the newly enacted Obamacare repealed, but experts said voters would get over that by November, when the economy picked up.

I was wrong. Republicans had a net gain of 63 seats in the biggest rout in 60+ years.

A 40-state sweep for Mitt Romney harkens only to Reagan’s victories in 1980 and 1984, but it will do.

I base my prediction on several factors:

1. Mitt Romney did well in all the Republican primaries in blue states. This shows he has organized Republicans in those states, even though they are small in number. Judging by my experience in West Virginia, they tend to be just as conservative as the Republicans elsewhere — it is tougher to be a minority than a majority — but they are pragmatic.

2. Mitt Romney should put New England in play. Boston dominates that section of the country and the people in that area know him. He’s the Mormon Kennedy to them. He does not smoke or drink. Ah, there’s a religion that the Kennedy clan should consider.

3. Barack Obama is running scared. 4 years ago, he was a blank slate. Today his blackboard is filled with a lot of action and little results. The $787 billion stimulus did nothing. The $700 billion TARP went into bankers pockets. The GM bailout affected only 1 in 5 Americans who actually buy a GM or Chrysler. The Arab Spring backfired. He gave up on Iraq and we are being tossed out of Afghanistan.

4. Obamacare. Never has a presidential domestic policy been so despised. The Vietnam War was more popular in 1968 — and LBJ decided against another term.

The 2012 election will not be about whether Ann Romney worked a day in her life or Rush Limbaugh calling a woman a slut or whether George Zimmerman is guilty of murder in the second degree.

The 2012 election is all about Barack Obama. For such a vain narcissist, Barack Obama sure is trying to get out of the spotlight on this one. That shows how little chance he really has.

My 2010 prediction.


http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/54259



Interesting. Check the comments section. Those guys are even more optimistic.
Jan. Jobs: 36,000!!

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #107 on: April 18, 2012, 08:54:39 PM »
At the rate we are going and seeing the pathetic Obama campaign so far, I think Romney is going landslide Obama. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #108 on: April 18, 2012, 09:05:05 PM »
Mitt Romney leads Obama in first Gallup national tracking poll
The Hill ^ | April 16, 2012 | Jonathan Easley
Posted on April 16, 2012 3:03:42 PM EDT by Free ThinkerNY

Mitt Romney leads President Obama in the first Gallup national daily tracking poll.

Romney took 47 percent support from surveyed registered voters, while Obama took 45 in a poll conducted between April 11 and April 15. Romney's edge though is within the poll's three point margin of error.

Independents tipped the scale in favor of Romney, going for the former Massachusetts governor 45 percent to 39.

(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...

Vince G, CSN MFT

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 25742
  • GETBIG3.COM!
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #109 on: April 18, 2012, 09:31:41 PM »
Bingo.

What sweet irony that the religious right, and all its associated bigotry, is so capable of imploding on itself.


Yep, they've been hyping so much on accusing Obama of being a Muslim that they are going to eat crow trying to explain why to vote for someone who REALLY ISN"T A CHRISTIAN



And then we have this....





Who the fuck does this shit while running for office??  That's why he couldn't win not one Southern state whatsoever.  You don't mock the South. 


Romney doesn't have any real momentum...its just temp because he's recently cleared the pack....as time goes on, it will drop very quickly.
A

MM2K

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1401
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #110 on: April 19, 2012, 01:42:32 AM »

Yep, they've been hyping so much on accusing Obama of being a Muslim that they are going to eat crow trying to explain why to vote for someone who REALLY ISN"T A CHRISTIAN



And then we have this....





Who the fuck does this shit while running for office??  That's why he couldn't win not one Southern state whatsoever.  You don't mock the South. 




Yeah, because Obama NEVER does that kind of thing.
Jan. Jobs: 36,000!!

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #111 on: April 19, 2012, 10:18:19 AM »
These Poll Numbers Point To DISASTER For Obama
Brett LoGiurato | 9 minutes ago | 133 | 2




Can he woo Independents back?

In February, the Democratic-leaning think tank Third Way chronicled the fight for the so-called "Obama Independents" — who authors Michelle Diggles and Lanae Erickson called the "heart" of the 2012 campaign. 

The gist is this:

In 2012, Independents are likely to comprise the highest proportion of the electorate since 1976, and winning them will be crucial to victory. But not all Independents are the same, and the real showdown for 2012 is over who will win the Obama Independents. If President Obama woos the vast majority of them back, he can be reelected. But if he performs among them like Democrats did in 2010, when one-quarter of the Obama Independents voted for a Republican, it’s going to be a long election night.

So despite his good fortunes with women voters, there some troubling warning signals for President Obama in the Quinnipiac poll out today. And it starts with the Independent vote.



Quinnipiac.edu


Barack Obama is losing the Independent vote by 7 percentage points — 46 percent to 39 percent. Of course, that doesn't measure the "Obama Independents," and a significant chunk — 8 percent — is still undecided.

But look at the trends from the past few days. They all point to Obama losing support among Independents, the group that handed him the election in 2008. He won 52 percent of the Independent vote vs. John McCain in the '08 election.

First, this is a marked shift from the Quinnipiac poll in February. Though that was a theoretical matchup between Obama and Romney because the Republican primaries were very much in full swing, Obama still had a 5-point lead on Romney — 46 to 41 percent.

That's a pretty significant 12-point swing with the most important group in the electorate.

Then there's the first Gallup daily tracking poll, which was among the first to signal the fact that Independents are now flocking to Romney. And a Fox News poll out last week also showed that Obama stands at a 6-point disadvantage to Romney among the Independent bloc.

And a survey performed by the Democratic think tank Third Way found that generally, so-called "swing independents" identify more with Mitt Romney's ideology. But that survey of the "swing Independents" — about 40 percent of Independents who will legitimately "swing" between parties in different elections — also found that they would vote for Obama today (44 percent to 38 percent).

Congress Is About To Pass A Bill That Restricts Traveling, Driving And International Banking


Please follow Politics on Twitter and Facebook.

Follow Brett LoGiurato on Twitter.
Ask Brett A Question > Tags: Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, 2012 Election, Election 2012

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/barack-obama-disastrous-poll-numbers-2012-4#ixzz1sVW2Bn4y



Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #112 on: April 19, 2012, 11:42:19 AM »
Election 2012 Trial Heat: Obama vs. Romney [MR +5 on 4/19/2012]
Gallup ^ | 4/19/12


These are the results when registered voters are asked: "Suppose the presidential election were held today. If Barack Obama were the Democratic Party's candidate and Mitt Romney were the Republican Party's candidate, who would you vote for Barack Obama, the Democrat or Mitt Romney, the Republican?" Those who are undecided are further asked if they lean more toward Obama or Romney and their leanings are incorporated into the results. Each five-day rolling average is based on telephone interviews with approximately 2,200 registered voters; Margin of error is ±3 percentage points.


(Excerpt) Read more at gallup.com ...





START PACKING YOUR SHIT OBAMA - YOU ARE GOING HOME! 



Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63934
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #113 on: April 19, 2012, 12:42:24 PM »

Yep, they've been hyping so much on accusing Obama of being a Muslim that they are going to eat crow trying to explain why to vote for someone who REALLY ISN"T A CHRISTIAN



And then we have this....





Who the fuck does this shit while running for office??  That's why he couldn't win not one Southern state whatsoever.  You don't mock the South. 


Romney doesn't have any real momentum...its just temp because he's recently cleared the pack....as time goes on, it will drop very quickly.

Uh, Obama? 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #114 on: April 19, 2012, 03:10:14 PM »
Victor Davis Hanson: Why Romney Has a Real Chance (It's more like ABO!)
National Review Online ^ | April 18, 2012 | Victor Davis Hanson

Posted on Thursday, April 19, 2012 5:35:46 PM by neverdem

The odds of defeating an incumbent president should be slim but they are in fact at least 50/50. Here are some reasons that this is true.

1) Romney is a more experienced and better candidate than he was in 2008. That often happens after a run or two. Nixon was tougher in 1968 than in 1960 in the way that Reagan was wiser in 1980 than in 1968 and 1976, and George H. W. Bush was better in 1988 than in 1980. McCain ran more effectively in the primaries in 2008 than he did in 2000. The Republican primary rough-housing sharpened Romney’s debating skills, and he seems far more comfortable than he was four years ago.

2) The old mantra that at some point the massive $5 trillion borrowing, the fed’s near-zero interest rate policies, and the natural cycle of recovery after a recession would kick in before the election increasingly appears somewhat dubious. The recovery is anemic, and seems stymied by high gas costs, fears over Obamacare, and a new feeling that lots of businesspeople with capital are strangely holding off, either scared of what more of Obama’s statist policies have in store for them, or in anger about being demonized by Obama, or in hopes Romney might win. The net result is that the recovery by November might not be as strong as was thought six months ago.

3) Romney is going to be a lot tougher on Obama than was McCain in 2008. For all the complaints against his moderation by the tea-party base, they will slowly rally to him as he makes arguments against Obama of the sort that McCain was perceived as unable or unwilling to make. So far Romney’s attitude is that he is in the arena where blows come thick and fast, and one can’t whine when being hit or hitting — a view far preferable to McCain’s lectures about what not to say or do in 2008. Left-wing preemptory charges that Romney is “swift-boating” or “going negative” will probably have slight effect on him. Just as Bill Clinton saw that Dukakis in 1988 had wanted to be liked rather than feared and so himself ran a quite different, tough 1992 race, so too Romney knows where McCain’s magnanimity got him in 2008. Romney won’t be liked by the press, knows it, and perhaps now welcomes it.

4) In 2008 Rudy Giuliani’s idea that Obama was out of the mainstream and a Chicago-style community organizer was not pressed in fear of the counter-charges that one was racialist or at least insensitive to the historic Obama candidacy. In 2012, there is a record, not an image or precedent, to vote for or against; and Romney will find it far easier to take down Obama than McCain found in 2008. That Obama did not reinvent the world as promised won’t mean that his supporters will vote for Romney, only that they won’t come out in the numbers or with the money as they did in 2008. There is no margin of error in 2012 and turnout will be everything for Obama.

5) The Republicans seem so far to have a lot more interest in defeating Obama than Democrats do in reelecting him. That enthusiasm level can change; but so far we are not going to see, I think, a lot of moderate Republicans writing about Obama’s sartorial flair and his first-class temperament, or screeds against a Republican incumbent. One meets lots of people who sheepishly confess they voted for Obama in 2008 but learned their lesson, less so those who regret that they voted for McCain and now promise to rectify that.

6) Obama is a great front-runner who can afford to talk of unity and magnanimity, but when behind he seems to revert to churlishness and petulance. The more he references Bush, the “mess” in 2008, tsunamis, and the EU meltdown, the more one wants to ask: When will he ever get a life? Them versus us is not “hope and change.”

7) Ann Romney, whether she is used in a more partisan style or more in the manner of a reticent Laura Bush, is an invaluable asset, both her narrative and her grace — a treasury really that somehow was under-appreciated in 2008 but won’t be in 2012.

8) Obama is becoming repetitive and tiring in his speechifying in a way that Carter did by late summer 1980 and George H. W. Bush did in 1992. Before he gets to the podium, Americans anticipate that he will blame someone for a current problem rather than introducing a positive solution — and they are beginning to get to the further point that they cannot only anticipate the villains of the hour, but the manner in which Obama will weave together the usual straw men, the formulaic “let me perfectly clear.” “make no mistake about it,” and the fat-cat/pay-your-fair share vocabulary. The public finally grows tired of whiners and blamers.

9) Juan Williams and others have made the argument that race explains the disenchantment of the white male working-class voter. I think that is hardly persuasive: Give that clinger voter just a year of 5 percent unemployment, $2-a-gallon gas, 4 percent GDP growth, a balanced budget, and he would gladly vote for Obama. The better point is not that race is a determinant in 2012 but that the charge has lost its currency. The minority of working-class white male voters who voted for Obama in 2008 was vastly higher than the percentage of African-Americans of all classes and both genders who voted for McCain, a moderate Republican who one would have thought might have gotten a larger percentage of the black vote than did George W. Bush. Based on percentages in 2008, I think that one could logically infer that the number of blacks who did not vote Republican as they had once done in the past was larger than the number of white male working-class voters who did not vote Democratic as they had in the past. Playing the race card in 2012 will prove a boomerang, especially if the Sharpton-Jackson nexus turns the Martin case into a reverse O. J. trial, and if Holder or Obama editorialize any more, or revert to the exhausting “stupidly,” “punish our enemies,” “cowards,” “my people,” tropes.

10) It is no longer “cool,” the thing to do, neat, or making a statement to vote for Obama. The 2008 lemming effect is over; no one believes any more that he will lower the seas or wants to believe that he can. Michelle’s lightness/darkness biblical image is hokey not moving. The fading 2008 Obama bumper stickers are no longer proof of one’s noble nature.



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








Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #115 on: April 19, 2012, 08:55:30 PM »
Barack Obama's re-election bid is already in deep trouble
Newt Gingrich may not have got the memo but the battle for the Republican nomination is over. Some in the Romney campaign were hoping for a Febuary end but others were fearing it would go on until June and a small number of Republicans even predicted a convention fight in August.

All in all, April is not a bad result for Mitt Romney - long enough to test him, short enough to allow him to focus solely on the general for the final six months.

Despite the very recent and ugly and negative primaries, Romney's struggle with conservatives and the relative difficulty he had in overcoming a lacklustre field, Republicans - who tend to fall in line more readily than Democrats - are already uniting behind him.


President Barack Obama: in deep trouble

The RealClearPolitics poll average puts President Barack Obama at 47 percent and Romney at 44.2 percent - statistically insignificant lead of 2.2 percent.

Drill down into the numbers of the latest CBS poll and there are ominous signs for Obama. Only 33 percent of Americans believe the economy is moving in the right direction. A mere 16 percent feel they are getting ahead financiallty. Some 38 percent think their situation will get worse of Obama is re-elected, 26 percent think it will get better.

A cursory look back at incumbent versus challenger presidential races does not give Obama much comfort.

In April 1976, President Gerald Ford was in about the same position as Obama is now. He lost the 1976 general election to Jimmy Carter by two points. In April 1980, President Jimmy Carter was leading Ronald Reagan by 38 points to 32 points with John Anderson on 22. In November 1980, Reagan won by three points.

In April 1992, President George H.W. Bush was on 46 percent and Bill Clinton on 26 percent. In November 1992, Clinton won by six points. In April 2004, President George W. Bush was on 50 percent and John Kerry on 44 percent. In November 2004, Bush won by two points.

We are already past the point at which it seems plausible that 2012 will be a repeat of 1996 when the incumbent (Clinton) cruised to a comfortable eight-point victory over the challenger (Bob Dole). Rather, we are probably looking at a 1992 scenario - an incumbent defeat - or a 2004 race - the incumbent (or the challenger) eking out a narrow victory.

All the signs are that Obama will try to do to Romney what Bush did to Kerry in 2004 - make the election turn on the character of the challenger rather than being a referendum on the incumbent. It was brutal, it was ugly and it was a process of grinding out a win on the basis of consolidating the Republican base and dividing the country.

The Romney campaign, which includes a number of people who helped map out and execute that strategy for Bush, is all too aware of the dangers of Romney falling into the same trap as Kerry and allowing himself to be defined by Obama.

Romney may be a wealthy, somewhat aloof blue blood from Massachusetts but he is no John Kerry. Indeed, the central part of his biography - the turnaround businessman - is almost ideally suited to this election, which is likely to be a transactional one in which voters ask: "Who can best deal with this economy?"

Just as Bush's allies turned what seemed to be Kerry's biggest strength - his Vietnam record in an election about national security - against him by a merciless "Swiftboating", Obama will seek to do the same to Romney by making his business record about pillaging from the poor.

But Americans are much less likely than Europeans to succumb to the temptations of class warfare. If he is to pull it off, Obama needs to do much better than jibing that he was not "born with a silver spoon in my mouth" and demanding Romney's tax returns.

The slow improvement in the economy thus far in 2012 might not help Obama, just as better numbers did not stop George H.W. Bush losing to Clinton in 1992. In fact, Bush's insistence that things were getting better when few in the country felt that way added insult to injury and made him seem out of touch.

Obama can't talk about the economy being bad because he would be held responsible for it. But going too far in talking it up could be just as disastrous. Politically, he has to thread the needle.

Romney's likeability numbers are anaemic at this stage but they may well not need to be. To paraphrase Obama's ill-judged snipe at Hillary Clinton in 2008, he could well be "likeable enough" already, given that the focus will in all likelihood be on Obama.

Obama will keep trying to talk about something, anything other than the economy - contraception and dogs being the most recent examples - but Romney has the relatively straightforward task of being disciplined enough to talk relentlessly about jobs and the economy. 

Certainly, Romney will never win the "guy you'd like to have a beer with" test, as Bush did in 2000. But 2012 will not be about that - there's more at stake than in 2000. And as Nate Silver argues, Romney has room to grow and favourability ratings at this stage are unreliable indicators for November.

If you viewed all this solely through the prism of media coverage and listened just to Washington pundits, you'd conclude that Obama has about an 80 percent chances of victory. In reality, his chances are much closer to 50:50, perhaps even with Romney holding an advantage (though many things can and will happen in six months).

This cognitive dissonance is partly because of a liberal tilt but also because most reporters and talking heads live in bubbles of comfortable affluence insulated from the economic pain most Americans are facing.

Even without factoring in the likely negative political impact of, say, Obamacare being struck down by the Supreme Court in June, Obama's re-election bid is already in deep trouble.

Only a fool would underestimate Obama's campaign machine, his ability to raise money and the fact that he remains personally likeable to a majority of Americans despite the state of the country. Anyone who argues at this stage that Obama is doomed to defeat is deluding themselves.

But the reality of this campaign is that it is likely to be brutal, very close - and could well result in Mitt Romney becoming the 45th President of the United States next January 20th.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #116 on: April 19, 2012, 09:05:08 PM »
LOL @ Romney walking into swing state Penn... dissing the most popular mom & pop bakery in the state by saying it looked like cookies from 7-11.


He is going to go out of his way to keep snatching defeat from jaws of victory.  Attacking cookies for no reason.  Dumb shit like that.  He has the ear of the people and he's saying those cookies look bland and cheap - not talking about how he'll fix america or - more importantly - asking the voters about THEMSELVES.

Clinton did great by saying "tell me YOUR story".   Obama too, hugging old ladies and whatnot.  Romney's brain says "hey mitt, say something negative about the food provided to you by locel peons".

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #117 on: April 20, 2012, 07:32:33 PM »
Skip to comments.

Obama Sees Steep Dropoff in Cash From Major Donors
New York Times ^ | April 20, 2012 | NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and DEREK WILLIS
Posted on April 20, 2012 9:54:18 PM EDT by lbryce

President Obama’s re-election campaign is straining to raise the huge sums it is counting on to run against Mitt Romney, with sharp dropoffs in donations from nearly every major industry forcing it to rely more than ever on small contributions and a relative handful of major donors.

From Wall Street to Hollywood, from doctors and lawyers, the traditional big sources of campaign cash are not delivering for the Obama campaign as they did four years ago. The falloff has left his fund-raising totals running behind where they were at the same point in 2008 — though well ahead of Mr. Romney’s — and has induced growing concern among aides and supporters as they confront the prospect that Republicans and their “super PAC” allies will hold a substantial advantage this fall.

With big checks no longer flowing as quickly into his campaign, Mr. Obama is leaning harder on his grass-roots supporters, whose small contributions make up well over half of the money he raised through the end of March, according to reports filed Friday with the Federal Election Commission. And Mr. Obama is asking far more of those large donors still giving, exploiting his joint fund-raising arrangement with the Democratic National Committee to collect five-figure checks from individuals who have already given the maximum $5,000 contribution to his re-election campaign.

“They clearly are feeling the pressure,” said one major Obama fund-raiser, who asked for anonymity to characterize his conversations with campaign officials. “They’re behind where they expected to be. You have to factor in $500 million-plus in Republican super PAC money.”

With no primary to excite his base, the economy struggling to rebound, and four years of political battles with Wall Street and other industries taking their toll, Mr. Obama’s campaign raised about $196 million through March,

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...

Vince G, CSN MFT

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 25742
  • GETBIG3.COM!
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #118 on: April 21, 2012, 11:05:58 AM »
Skip to comments.

Obama Sees Steep Dropoff in Cash From Major Donors
New York Times ^ | April 20, 2012 | NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and DEREK WILLIS
Posted on April 20, 2012 9:54:18 PM EDT by lbryce

President Obama’s re-election campaign is straining to raise the huge sums it is counting on to run against Mitt Romney, with sharp dropoffs in donations from nearly every major industry forcing it to rely more than ever on small contributions and a relative handful of major donors.

From Wall Street to Hollywood, from doctors and lawyers, the traditional big sources of campaign cash are not delivering for the Obama campaign as they did four years ago. The falloff has left his fund-raising totals running behind where they were at the same point in 2008 — though well ahead of Mr. Romney’s — and has induced growing concern among aides and supporters as they confront the prospect that Republicans and their “super PAC” allies will hold a substantial advantage this fall.

With big checks no longer flowing as quickly into his campaign, Mr. Obama is leaning harder on his grass-roots supporters, whose small contributions make up well over half of the money he raised through the end of March, according to reports filed Friday with the Federal Election Commission. And Mr. Obama is asking far more of those large donors still giving, exploiting his joint fund-raising arrangement with the Democratic National Committee to collect five-figure checks from individuals who have already given the maximum $5,000 contribution to his re-election campaign.

“They clearly are feeling the pressure,” said one major Obama fund-raiser, who asked for anonymity to characterize his conversations with campaign officials. “They’re behind where they expected to be. You have to factor in $500 million-plus in Republican super PAC money.”

With no primary to excite his base, the economy struggling to rebound, and four years of political battles with Wall Street and other industries taking their toll, Mr. Obama’s campaign raised about $196 million through March,

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


Obama's War Chest....104 Million
Mitt Romney....11.2 million


 ::)

A

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #119 on: April 21, 2012, 02:16:18 PM »
Obama's War Chest....104 Million
Mitt Romney....11.2 million


94% of the time, the candidate with mo money wins.  Romney better get to raising some cash.

SuperPACs will matter huge here too.  newt's 20 mil from that one guy kept the race alive an extra month.

whork

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6587
  • Getbig!
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #120 on: April 21, 2012, 05:16:16 PM »

Yep, they've been hyping so much on accusing Obama of being a Muslim that they are going to eat crow trying to explain why to vote for someone who REALLY ISN"T A CHRISTIAN



And then we have this....





Who the fuck does this shit while running for office??  That's why he couldn't win not one Southern state whatsoever.  You don't mock the South. 


Romney doesn't have any real momentum...its just temp because he's recently cleared the pack....as time goes on, it will drop very quickly.

Im not a Romney fan but Obama is shit too so...

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-june-15-2011/west-wing-story

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #121 on: April 23, 2012, 01:20:34 PM »
[ Invalid YouTube link ]

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63934
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #122 on: April 23, 2012, 01:34:43 PM »
[ Invalid YouTube link ]

He's such a friggin liar.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #123 on: April 23, 2012, 02:00:26 PM »
the personalities and lies they tell doesn't affect us - the LEGISLATION does.

Obama hasn't signed an assault weapons ban. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39757
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama vs Romney
« Reply #124 on: April 23, 2012, 02:02:16 PM »
the personalities and lies they tell doesn't affect us - the LEGISLATION does.

Obama hasn't signed an assault weapons ban. 

No - his policies only killed 2 border agents and hundreds of mexicans and 1500 guns still loose. 

And F you about polices - obamacare, dodd frank, stim bill, and the zillions of executive orders and mndates have crippled this nation!