Newt is pulling away in all the polls.

Serious discussions about nothing ..."Interesting", "yes very interesting", "well i think", "well yes I agree",.......


STFU.... It's ROMNEY

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

The Viking wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Personally I am not understanding Gingrich's appeal. Maybe his work on balancing the budget under Clinton?

I know he has been vetted, but he does seem so vulnerable. And like said above, he just doesn't have the organization. I think he isn't on the primary ballot in all the states he needs to be.

Personally I think it is his tough talk in the debates and he is very intelligent. AND he is an anti Romney candidate. That is it. You are right, he already missed Missouri. Hopefully he won't miss any more deadlines for states. And he just opened his first office in Iowa 34 days before the caucus. And remember Caucuses are different than primaries in the fact they have to take a whole night to break into groups and debate and discuss and then vote in front of everyone. Tehy are saying that only about 10% of Iowan's come out for that. So they have to be the ones with passion especially in Iowa in the dead of Winter. So whoever fires up their people to show up will get a lot more than the polls show of people who just answer on the phone. I doubt 40% of people who support a candidate will show up for a caucus if they think they are winning handidly. tehy will let others go. And Perry is sending 600 people, many high profile names to Iowa this month through the election to get out his voters. Organization makes a huge difference in a Caucus. I do fear a huge Paulbot turnout though.

This is where the money, experience and great organizational skills kick in.

Rick Perry’s presidential campaign plans to bring more than 600 influential Texans to Iowa this month as part of a major blitz for a strong finish in the first state to vote.

The massive Perry posse will include Republican elected officials such as Attorney General Greg Abbott and Comptroller Susan Combs, party stalwarts, consultants, lobbyists, financers and friends that will reach out to Republicans in the Hawkeye State and ask them to take a fresh look at the Texas governor.


http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics ... n-iowa.ece

First you say "Personally I think it is his tough talk in the debates and he is very intelligent." and then " Like he said, if you want a slick debator (which it seems is all that people want) then he is not your man." What do you want Viking... someone who is a slick debater (it's spelt "debater"... Mr. More Intelligent Than Kate) or someone who is neither? You're extremely obtuse.

His positions are all over the place so I don't trust that and he has enough baggage to allow Barney Fwank to beat him if he wanted. And no money and no organization. WHo cares if he is smart on history. Again, I can type slower if you need. I looked at ALL their track records, history voting records, bills passed, views and beliefs. I don't getted reeled in by a slick talker.

And :rofl rofllol You just proved my point!! You won't answer my question and all you can do is point out a spelling error!! You are so shallow! :rofl rofllol

Vice Lord wrote: Serious discussions about nothing ..."Interesting", "yes very interesting", "well i think", "well yes I agree",.......


STFU.... It's ROMNEY

Romney will be done after Super Tuesday again.

Trust me-Its Romney

You are getting all excited watching pro wrestling here..Relax guys..The outcome has already been determined

Its Romney

Vice Lord wrote: Trust me-Its Romney

I agree, it's Romney.

And I agree the outcome has already been determined. This is all bread and circuses.

Kinda like a runaway train, fun to watch but in the end it's a disaster.

AspenValley wrote:

Vice Lord wrote: Trust me-Its Romney

I agree, it's Romney.

Guiliani was leading the polls 4 years ago. How did that work out?

Personally I don't have a problem with Mitt, but conservative Christians don't like that he is a Mormon and anti-Obamacare people don't like that he created the prototype and he won't admit it is a mistake!

The Viking wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

The Viking wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Personally I am not understanding Gingrich's appeal. Maybe his work on balancing the budget under Clinton?

I know he has been vetted, but he does seem so vulnerable. And like said above, he just doesn't have the organization. I think he isn't on the primary ballot in all the states he needs to be.

Personally I think it is his tough talk in the debates and he is very intelligent. AND he is an anti Romney candidate. That is it. You are right, he already missed Missouri. Hopefully he won't miss any more deadlines for states. And he just opened his first office in Iowa 34 days before the caucus. And remember Caucuses are different than primaries in the fact they have to take a whole night to break into groups and debate and discuss and then vote in front of everyone. Tehy are saying that only about 10% of Iowan's come out for that. So they have to be the ones with passion especially in Iowa in the dead of Winter. So whoever fires up their people to show up will get a lot more than the polls show of people who just answer on the phone. I doubt 40% of people who support a candidate will show up for a caucus if they think they are winning handidly. tehy will let others go. And Perry is sending 600 people, many high profile names to Iowa this month through the election to get out his voters. Organization makes a huge difference in a Caucus. I do fear a huge Paulbot turnout though.

This is where the money, experience and great organizational skills kick in.

Rick Perry’s presidential campaign plans to bring more than 600 influential Texans to Iowa this month as part of a major blitz for a strong finish in the first state to vote.

The massive Perry posse will include Republican elected officials such as Attorney General Greg Abbott and Comptroller Susan Combs, party stalwarts, consultants, lobbyists, financers and friends that will reach out to Republicans in the Hawkeye State and ask them to take a fresh look at the Texas governor.


http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics ... n-iowa.ece

First you say "Personally I think it is his tough talk in the debates and he is very intelligent." and then " Like he said, if you want a slick debator (which it seems is all that people want) then he is not your man." What do you want Viking... someone who is a slick debater (it's spelt "debater"... Mr. More Intelligent Than Kate) or someone who is neither? You're extremely obtuse.

His positions are all over the place so I don't trust that and he has enough baggage to allow Barney Fwank to beat him if he wanted. And no money and no organization. WHo cares if he is smart on history. Again, I can type slower if you need. I looked at ALL their track records, history voting records, bills passed, views and beliefs. I don't getted reeled in by a slick talker.

And :rofl rofllol You just proved my point!! You won't answer my question and all you can do is point out a spelling error!! You are so shallow! :rofl rofllol

Your so obtuse... you've spent thread after thread pointing out gaffs and errors... what's good for the goose... you are so shallow.