Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Bindare_Dundat on December 29, 2011, 02:42:29 PM
-
Another one gone.
Bachmann’s Iowa political director, Wes Enos, who like Sorenson joined her campaign in its first days, released a statement under Ron Paul’s letterhead refuting Bachmann’s assertion that Sorenson had been paid to go. Sorenson and Enos both say the state senator decided to back Paul because he had many friends on that campaign, and believed Paul has the best chance of winning.
According to Bachmann spokeswoman Alice Stewart, Enos “is no longer with us,” but she would not confirm whether he’d been fired for insubordination or left on his own accord.
-
After Iowa she is done. Her biggest mistake was going after Perry on that gardisil thing. After that she just stayed in the mud.
-
Statement from Wes:"I said what I had to say and fully accept the consequences of that decision. I wouldn't take it back even if I could."
Another source: Steve Deace
Now she says the Paul people bought Sorenson's allegiance, but her now former political director Wes Enos came forward and disputed that allegation. Enos, by the way, has since been fired.
Yup, she is desperate and done.
-
She was done before Iowa. Failing to place in her own backyard will probably cause her to quit.
-
She has seriously lost her mind on CNN
-
She was done before Iowa. Failing to place in her own backyard will probably cause her to quit.
reminds me of newt in virginia
-
She sure has a strange way of repaying Paul after he helped her out. She said Ron PAul paid off this guy becasue Paul was afraid of the momentum she was witnessing in her campaign. Out to lunch.
-
she's kinda delusional on this one.
-
LOL @ Bachmann conflating Iran getting nuclear weapons with danger to Americans. The DoD itself recognizes that Iran doesn't have the capability to bomb Israel, let alone the United States.
-
LOL @ Bachmann conflating Iran getting nuclear weapons with danger to Americans. The DoD itself recognizes that Iran doesn't have the capability to bomb Israel, let alone the United States.
Her biggest mistake was going negative relative to other repubs. She should have stayed on the attack on Obama.
-
Her biggest mistake was going negative relative to other repubs. She should have stayed on the attack on Obama.
True. I don't think she ever had a shot either way though. She has that crazy evangelical Christian thing going for her, which works for a lot of social conservatives, but is scary to 75% of the American public.
-
True. I don't think she ever had a shot either way though. She has that crazy evangelical Christian thing going for her, which works for a lot of social conservatives, but is scary to 75% of the American public.
A miracle is going to pull her through. ::) Her prop was nice too. "Look at me, Im not a racist!" lol
-
True. I don't think she ever had a shot either way though. She has that crazy evangelical Christian thing going for her, which works for a lot of social conservatives, but is scary to 75% of the American public.
Nothing crazy about her at all. She is absolutely right about what needs to happen to fix the economy. It's too bad she couldn't get off the ground.
-
Nothing crazy about her at all. She is absolutely right about what needs to happen to fix the economy. It's too bad she couldn't get off the ground.
she accused the man of leaving her for ron paul because - ron paul gave the man a large amount of money to do it.
that's a helluva charge to levy without proof.
-
Nothing crazy about her at all. She is absolutely right about what needs to happen to fix the economy. It's too bad she couldn't get off the ground.
She thinks theres was a conspiracy against her, planned months before, to steal Sorenson from her by the Paul campaign. She is a CT nut.
-
Nothing crazy about her at all. She is absolutely right about what needs to happen to fix the economy. It's too bad she couldn't get off the ground.
What part about corporate tax havens are going to fix the economy? Despite there being zero evidence for tax havens creating growth or jobs, what part about her plan does not fall under the rule of decades of counter evidence proving otherwise?
She's a parrot and gets her ideas from other candidates. After extensive searching, even on her own website, I'm unable to find even a remotely detailed outline of what she would do to fix the economy. Her ideas are sweeping generalizations she's picked up from other candidates and the substance level of her message is barely skin deep.
She's a flake with as much fortitude as a flacid penis, that's why she never got off the ground.
-
She thinks theres was a conspiracy against here from the Paul campaign. She is a CT nut.
Her bus was photographed circling the block when he was giving interviews to FOX news on the sidewalk. Creepy. Reminds me of her crouching to hide during a protest once?
-
Nothing crazy about her at all. She is absolutely right about what needs to happen to fix the economy. It's too bad she couldn't get off the ground.
I do agree with you that she's right about the economy. But she's wrong about everything else. And, incidentally, she gets her economic ideas from Ron Paul.
-
Her bus was photographed circling the block when he was giving interviews to FOX news on the sidewalk. Creepy. Reminds me of her crouching to hide during a protest once?
lmao.
-
What part about corporate tax havens are going to fix the economy? Despite there being zero evidence for tax havens creating growth or jobs, what part about her plan does not fall under the rule of decades of counter evidence proving otherwise?
Zero evidence? Econometric studies have shown that lower corporate tax rates mean greater economic growth: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272704001343#SECX11 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272704001343#SECX11)
Also, she says that she'd refuse to raise the debt ceiling and cut spending. Cutting spending also has been empirically proven to be a superior method for balancing the budget: http://www.nber.org/papers/w15438 (http://www.nber.org/papers/w15438)
Like I said... she's right on the econ, wrong about everything else.
-
imagine how pissed repubs will be... if they spend the next year playing the acceptance card... defending mitt as a solid conservative, attacking ron paul, bragging about newt's awesomeness, defending perry's 78 IQ...
And then, despite all that delusional kneepadding, Obama STILL wins re-election.
They did it in 2008. They said Mccain wasn't lying about the bumps on his head, they said Palin was brilliant, they said the economy was strong, they blamed everything on Clinton.
And their party lost the election because they SETTLED. THey let hannity and friends tell them that Mccain was electable, and ron paul and others were not.
And, they're doing it again. So they deserve 4 more years of obama, to be honest. THey have a very viable ron paul in great money shape, and they're wasting it. Unreal. IMO, it's the duty of every repub to say to other repubs "Ron Paul is the only chance we have to win!"
-
She thinks theres was a conspiracy against her, planned months before, to steal Sorenson from her by the Paul campaign. She is a CT nut.
lol
-
What part about corporate tax havens are going to fix the economy? Despite there being zero evidence for tax havens creating growth or jobs, what part about her plan does not fall under the rule of decades of counter evidence proving otherwise?
She's a parrot and gets her ideas from other candidates. After extensive searching, even on her own website, I'm unable to find even a remotely detailed outline of what she would do to fix the economy. Her ideas are sweeping generalizations she's picked up from other candidates and the substance level of her message is barely skin deep.
She's a flake with as much fortitude as a flacid penis, that's why she never got off the ground.
Where are you getting corporate tax havens from?
She doesn't need original ideas. She needs the right ideas. She understands we have to stop spending money we don't have and reduce everyone's tax burden.
-
Zero evidence? Econometric studies have shown that lower corporate tax rates mean greater economic growth: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272704001343#SECX11 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272704001343#SECX11)
Also, she says that she'd refuse to raise the debt ceiling and cut spending. Cutting spending also has been empirically proven to be a superior method for balancing the budget: http://www.nber.org/papers/w15438 (http://www.nber.org/papers/w15438)
Like I said... she's right on the econ, wrong about everything else.
Corporate tax rates and corporate tax havens are two different issues.
-
Where are you getting corporate tax havens from?
She doesn't need original ideas. She needs the right ideas. She understands we have to stop spending money we don't have and reduce everyone's tax burden.
Right off her website, it's the first point in her 11 point fix the economy plan:
http://www.michelebachmann.com/issues/americanjobsrightnow/
-
I should run for President. My econ plan: eliminate payroll & corporate tax, drastically reduce regulatory state, tell Fed to keep stable money supply, cut all non-security related and non-SS/Medicare spending. 8)
Corporate tax rates and corporate tax havens are two different issues.
If you want to become a tax have, then you need to cut taxes, amirite? ???
-
I do agree with you that she's right about the economy. But she's wrong about everything else. And, incidentally, she gets her economic ideas from Ron Paul.
She's right about the size and scope of government. She's right about preserving traditional marriage, foreign policy, the environment, etc.
-
She's right about the size and scope of government. She's right about preserving traditional marriage, foreign policy, the environment, etc.
She's absolutely wrong on the whole social conservatism thing... but she's a good candidate on foreign policy issues if you're an Israeli bureaucrat or a Saudi royal.
-
More Bad News For Michele Bachmann As Super PAC Throws Her Under The Bus
The Daily - A political action committee which had planned to support Michele Bachmann's presidential campaign has very quietly defected to Mitt Romney - and it's spending big on his behalf. Citizens for a Working America, the so-called Super PAC which aired TV ads against a Democratic congressional candidate last year, had indicated earlier this year that it was backing the Minnesota congresswoman in the GOP nominating contest. But the group instead made a $475,000 Iowa ad buy on Christmas Eve in support of Romney, according to Federal Election Commission data published today.
-
Bachmann on radio now claiming Kent Sorensen "said it was a great deal of money" Paul offered him to switch.
http://twitter.com/#!/daveweigel/status/152407631779209218
7:42 AM PT: And now another Bachmann adviser—Wes Enos, her Iowa political director—is defending Sorenson from Bachmann's allegations:
Wes Enos, Bachmann’s Iowa political director, released a statement Thursday defending Sorenson from Bachmann’s accusation that Paul offered him money to switch allegiances.
In a statement distributed by Sorenson, Enos stated “unequivocally” that Sorenson’s decision was “in no way financially motivated.”
“His decision had more to do with the fact that the Ron Paul supporters have been something of a family to him since he was first elected in 2008 and here in the end, as it becomes more and more apparent that the caucus cycle is coming to an end, Kent believed that he needed to be with them as they stand on the cusp of a potential caucus upset,” Enos said in the statement.
-
I should run for President. My econ plan: eliminate payroll & corporate tax, drastically reduce regulatory state, tell Fed to keep stable money supply, cut all non-security related and non-SS/Medicare spending. 8)
If you want to become a tax have, then you need to cut taxes, amirite? ???
Again, they are two very different issues. A repatriation tax haven/holiday waives some or all of the residual U.S. tax owed on the income earned abroad at some point in the past by U.S. companies’ foreign subsidiaries. Under a system known as “worldwide taxation” this income is subject to tax first in the foreign jurisdiction and again in the United States if and when the earnings are returned via a dividend payment from the foreign subsidiary to the U.S. parent company. U.S. rules on international taxes are highly complex, but the essential issue is that additional U.S. tax is due on these repatriated earnings if the tax levied abroad is less than the tax levied in the United States.
-
She's absolutely wrong on the whole social conservatism thing...
Not really. The majority of the country is right of center both fiscally and socially.
-
Not really. The majority of the country is right of center both fiscally and socially.
why did they elect a person who was way left - both fiscally and socially - in 2008?
And how come they keep voting down the super conservative anti-abortion laws?
-
It's not looking good. Who will she endorse if she falls to 5th or 7th in iowa? Mitt, in case he chooses her for VP?
Bachmann campaign loses second key staffer in Ron Paul flap
3 hours ago
Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann's campaign lost another high-ranking staff member on Thursday after that staffer defended another former Bachmann official's defection to a rival campaign.
Wes Enos, Bachmann's political director, has left the campaign, spokeswoman Alice Stewart confirmed to NBC News on Thursday evening.
The resignation comes on the heels of last night's announcement by Iowa state Sen. Kent Sorenson, who had served as Bachmann's Iowa chairman, that he had stepped down from that position to support Texas Rep. Ron Paul's campaign instead.
-
I expect an announcement of her dropping on Wednesday.
-
I expect an announcement of her dropping on Wednesday.
oh, the day after iowa? Possible.
It's be interesting to see to which candidate her delegates defect.
If you stuck with MBachmann all this time, why did you? not because you really saw her winning - you must have believed bigtime in her small govt beliefs? If so, despite her battles with rpaul on iran, will the supporters of MB vote RP?
Surely they won't say "I loved bachman's small govt beleif, so a guy like mitt really matches my beliefs!" Same with mitt.
As much as they did battle - ron paul may benefit most from her 4 or 6% of delegates giving up on her.
-
oh, the day after iowa? Possible.
It's be interesting to see to which candidate her delegates defect.
If you stuck with MBachmann all this time, why did you? not because you really saw her winning - you must have believed bigtime in her small govt beliefs? If so, despite her battles with rpaul on iran, will the supporters of MB vote RP?
Surely they won't say "I loved bachman's small govt beleif, so a guy like mitt really matches my beliefs!" Same with mitt.
As much as they did battle - ron paul may benefit most from her 4 or 6% of delegates giving up on her.
I agree. Her supporters "should" have nothing in common with Romney unless she fear mongered them on Pauls Iran stance.
-
h