HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Report: Obama's campaign ...

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 04:13 AM

Report: Obama's campaign more wired than Romney's

Source: Boston Globe

Four years ago, then-Sen. Barack Obama got a head start on Arizona Sen. John McCain when it came to reaching voters online, on their mobile phones and on social media. Young voters, the group most likely to tune in digitally to the presidential campaign, broke overwhelmingly for Obama, giving him the biggest margin of victory among that age group ever recorded.

This year, Obama again holds an advantage over his Republican opponent on the digital front, says a report released Wednesday by the Pew Research Center. The group’s Project for Excellent in Journalism analyzed both campaigns’ efforts between June 4-17 and found Obama far outpacing Mitt Romney.

Obama’s team posted almost four times as much content during the period, the report said, and maintained an active presence on almost twice as many platforms. On Twitter, Romney’s campaign tweeted about once a day, while Obama’s campaign averaged 29 daily tweets. Obama also posted about twice as many YouTube videos and blog entries.


Read more: http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2012/president/candidates/romney/2012/08/15/report-obama-campaign-more-wired-than-romney/Mf4e9M181AyfRMfOOK9RXL/story.html



I know many find this stuff trivial, but I don't. I think it's important to keep your voters engaged and Obama does that very well. My guess is that Obama has a far stronger ground game and more grassroots than Romney and it will be a factor come November.

63 replies, 24318 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 63 replies Author Time Post
Reply Report: Obama's campaign more wired than Romney's (Original post)
Drunken Irishman Aug 2012 OP
davidpdx Aug 2012 #1
dealrepairs Aug 2012 #2
viguy007 Aug 2012 #3
JNelson6563 Aug 2012 #4
viguy007 Aug 2012 #43
K8-EEE Aug 2012 #7
viguy007 Aug 2012 #44
CJCRANE Aug 2012 #8
DippyDem Aug 2012 #11
viguy007 Aug 2012 #51
DippyDem Aug 2012 #10
Astazia Aug 2012 #13
calimary Aug 2012 #46
Bluenorthwest Aug 2012 #14
Marrah_G Aug 2012 #20
Inuca Aug 2012 #15
grantcart Aug 2012 #16
handmade34 Aug 2012 #17
DFW Aug 2012 #18
PETRUS Aug 2012 #37
DFW Aug 2012 #39
PETRUS Aug 2012 #41
Marrah_G Aug 2012 #19
demosincebirth Aug 2012 #21
Historic NY Aug 2012 #22
ellenfl Aug 2012 #23
chknltl Aug 2012 #25
ann--- Aug 2012 #26
CJCRANE Aug 2012 #27
NashvilleLefty Aug 2012 #35
calimary Aug 2012 #48
calimary Aug 2012 #47
Tophogbbq Aug 2012 #28
calimary Aug 2012 #49
FloridaJudy Aug 2012 #29
great white snark Aug 2012 #30
elleng Aug 2012 #31
GoddessOfGuinness Aug 2012 #33
NashvilleLefty Aug 2012 #34
LeftGuy Aug 2012 #36
calimary Aug 2012 #50
Kennah Aug 2012 #38
emsimon33 Aug 2012 #42
calimary Aug 2012 #45
Albert_Wentworth Aug 2012 #52
DURHAM D Aug 2012 #53
FloridaJudy Aug 2012 #54
CJCRANE Aug 2012 #55
viguy007 Aug 2012 #60
CJCRANE Aug 2012 #61
Ruby the Liberal Aug 2012 #57
viguy007 Aug 2012 #59
outsideworld Aug 2012 #63
Zorra Aug 2012 #56
outsideworld Aug 2012 #58
Cee Aug 2012 #62
Judi Lynn Aug 2012 #5
Not Me Aug 2012 #6
Duchess St.Rollins Aug 2012 #9
nanabugg Aug 2012 #12
Tarheel_Dem Aug 2012 #24
Brother Buzz Aug 2012 #32
ashling Aug 2012 #40

Response to Drunken Irishman (Original post)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 04:29 AM

1. It certainly isn't surprising

The Obama campaign has done a great job making use of technology.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Original post)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 04:33 AM

2. Spam deleted by tjwmason (MIR Team)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Original post)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 04:42 AM

3. How can I send this to as many people as possible, please help

 

I'm a life-long Republican, voted for John McCain, and supported Mitt Romney as the most realistic candidate in the primaries. However, as both a Republican and more importantly an American, I did not share Rush Limbaugh's view expressed in January 2009: “I disagree fervently with the people on our [Republican] side of the aisle who have caved and who say, ‘Well, I hope he [President Obama] succeeds'... I hope he fails.” Nor do I agree with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell who in October of 2010, was asked what "the job" of Republicans in Congress was. McConnell answered, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." We were in the middle of the greatest economic crisis since the 1930's and my party has as its main goal trying to make sure the president fails — even if the country fails right along with him. What has happened to my Republican party, this is not a sporting event, we all either win or lose together.

In the past, Republicans were pragmatic, not ideological; they would ask "does it work", not "does it fit into my theory." Ronald Reagan is known for his tax cuts, but he also pragmatically raised taxes 11 times to address the growing budget deficit, and had a good relationship with Democratic Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill. Since Reagan was pragmatic, not ideological, he compromised and worked with congress and accomplished what needed to be done to help the economy. Pragmatic non-ideological republican presidents never had a problem expanding the national government to solve national problems. Republican President Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Republican President Theodore Roosevelt created the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Republican President Ford created the first federal regulatory program in education, with a program for special needs children. Republican President George Bush Sr. signed the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and raised taxes to fight the deficit. Republican President Eisenhower warned: "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, by the military–industrial complex" and was responsible for one of the largest Infrastructure projects in American history (Interstate Highway System). President Eisenhower also sent federal troops to Little Rock Arkansas so that discrimination against black school children would be ended. These men were not Left-wing radical hippies, but the "Tea Party movement" and their supporters in Congress would call them Socialist.

When I voted for Mitt Romney in the primaries, I believed Mitt was a moderate pragmatic Republican as was his father, George, when governor of Michigan, and as was Mitt himself when he was governor of Massachusetts. I thought Mitt had to move to the right to secure the nomination, but once he had it, he would move back to the moderate pragmatic center. Unfortunately, that has not happened; so I must reevaluate him considering this and the recent revelations about the secrecy with which he handles his financial affairs.

While I question many of President Obama's policies, I can not be sure Mitt's policies regarding the economy would have been any better. Mitt's business experience and wealth come from Wall Street, not Main Street, and I doubt he would have broken up the banks "too big to fail." As he said "The TARP (bank bailout) program was designed to keep the financial system going," and as a CEO of a private equity firm, he was a part of this financial system. If anything, given his background and avowed dislike of government regulation, I believe Mitt would have been even more hands off overseeing Wall Street and the banks "too big to fail." I know this non-involvement would NOT help a small business on Main Street. The firms which benefited from TARP, acted completely irresponsibly and contrary to the intent of the program by giving their executives huge bonuses, while restricting credit to small businesses. The problem with TARP, a program devised under President Bush, was too little regulation not too much.

I am very disappointed in the pace of the economic recovery, yet I also know this was not an ordinary business cycle recession. It was initiated by an institutional Bank Panic in 2008, akin to the 1929 Wall Street Crash, in which some of the largest and most prestigious banks and financial corporations were threatened with failure and bankruptcy (ie Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, AIG, etc). By the end of 2008 the lost of potential purchasing power (decline in value of homes, stocks, IRA's etc) in the United States alone, exceeded 14.5 TRILLION DOLLARS. Thanks to an old regulation left over from the 1930's, the FDIC, the anxiety and fear did not spread to small depositors at local banks, so there was no run on these small local banks. If not for the FDIC the economic crisis we faced would have been much worse, proving not all regulation is bad. However, since these small local banks also had their assets affected by the crisis, and the large banks were not extending credit to them, they could not make loans. The flow of small business credit dried up. The prevailing fear was that this panic would feed on itself, so that the economy would continue to spiral down. Talk of a second Great Depression, with its unemployment rate of more then 25% became widespread.

It was once said, "As GM goes, so goes the nation." As people lost purchasing power, the demand for new cars dried up as people stopped buying them. This caused the car companies, including GM, to become threatened with bankruptcy. If the car companies went bankrupt, more then 100,000 additional workers would be unemployed. It was feared this would only be the tip of the iceberg as people wondered what would be the ripple effect on car part manufacturers, and what would be the effect on consumer confidence? Obama deviated from TRAP's stated purpose when he, without congressional authorization, used TARP to bail out GM and Chrysler thereby saving them from bankruptcy. Mitt would have not done this, as he stated: "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt." However, who would bid for these companies at this time of economic uncertainty, even Mitt's former company, Bain Capital, had reduced their acquisitions. I fear that China, for symbolic, political, and economic reasons might have bid to take over GM in a bankruptcy proceeding. This may seem farfetched until you realize GM sold more cars in China last year, then it sold in the United States. While I strongly oppose Obama's actions in theory, in practicality there may have been no other choice. Obama was pragmatic, he made a decision that solved the problem.

The TARP and actions by the Federal Reserve System (FED) provided approximately 3 trillion dollars for the financial system which stabilized it. Thus the financial system's private debt became public debt, and was added to the federal deficit. As opposed to this as I might be on a theoretical basis, I know as Mitt said "The TARP (bank bailout) program was designed to keep the financial system going." However, the Obama "Stimulus Program" which also included tax cuts, was completely inadequate. How can you expect to fill a 14.5 TRILLION DOLLAR HOLE caused by lost potential purchasing power with a program of less then one trillion dollars? The Stimulus should have been twice the size that it was. Between the TARP, the stimulus program, and the temporary cuts in the payroll tax, enough money was pumped into the economy to stabilize it and end the downward spiral into a depression. However these programs were not enough to "jump start" the economy, so that it would grow fast enough to reduce unemployment significantly. Yet, before I can condemn Obama I must ask, what role did my party play in preventing the "Stimulus Program" from being adequate enough to solve the economic problem.

We were told the stimulus program could not be larger because of the federal budget deficit, and like any family, when you are too far into debt you must tighten your belt and cut back on expenditures. I believe in fiscal responsibility, but I see one problem with this line of reasoning; when you have an emergency that threatens your life, you spend whatever you have to in order to recover. Once the recovery occurs, you then tighten your belt in order to get out of debt. The economic crisis of 2008 was such an emergency for the American economy. The last time we had a equivalent emergency (Great Depression/World War 2) debt as a share of the economy peaked at 112.7% of gross domestic product (GDP) in 1945. In the present emergency (Great Recession/War on Terror) debt as a share of the economy will reach roughly 77% of gross domestic product this year according to the independent and nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

We should not be worrying about the annual deficit. If a tax is money being removed from the economy, then government spending is money being added to the economy, and the deficit is the measure of degree the economy is being stimulated by the government. The problem with deficits, it is said, is that interest rates on government bonds will go up, yet the interest rate paid by government bonds now are the lowest they have ever been. Now it is time to rebuild America's infrastructure, as we rebuilt Europe after World War 2 with the Marshall Plan; to fix our infrastructure, from dilapidated levees to collapsing bridges and leaking dams, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) has estimated that the country needs to spend $1.6 trillion. This construction will help the economy and the cost, based on the interest rate, will never be lower. Neither Mitt Romney nor President Obama have proposed a stimulus program of this size, both are trapped by an ideology that says deficits are bad, no matter what is the underlying circumstances.

While Mitt Romney and Barack Obama did not disagree over the need or size of the stimulus program, they do disagree on what type of stimulus would be most effective. Mitt believed taxes should be lowered for job creators who are people with high incomes, aka "the investor class" or "the rich." In theory, this money would be invested to build new business enterprises which would create jobs, thereby creating demand for good and services. However, there is no way to guarantee this money would not be sent to "tax haven offshore banks" or be invested in foreign countries for a higher return, or even hidden away with gold. These will not circulate this money into the American economy and help it grow to produce jobs. Obama believed the money should be spent on people who will purchase goods and services with any extra money they have, aka "the American consumer" or "the middle class." He lowered taxes for low and middle income workers and increased spending directly by the government to create infrastructure like roads and schools, prevent layoffs in local communities, and support unemployed consumers who are able to buy products, thereby creating demand for good and services and creating jobs. Obama would quote the famous American investor Warren Buffett who said "the only reason why I'm going to hire is if there's more demand." Mitt's approach was "investor" or "supply side" driven; Obama's approach was "consumer" or "demand side" driven.

I can use myself as an example since I am considered a successful businessman. I have never made a business decision based on taxes. They never deterred me from expanding my business when I saw an opportunity to meet a demand by consumers. Taxes never took 100% of any additional income I made by expanding my business. They were just a cost of doing business like any other necessary cost. They paid for services my business and I, as an individual, needed, such as policemen, firemen, and road maintenance. On the other hand, while I always appreciate lower taxes, they would not effect how I ran my business. If my taxes were lowered, but there was no additional demand by consumers, I would not expand my business. However, I would take a nice European vacation and see Paris or Rome, or buy a Mercedes-Benz rather then a Ford, or perhaps buy a second home on a Caribbean island and open up a bank account there. Like any successful businessman, I am not ideological, I am pragmatic; I just wish government behaved the same way.

Mitt Romney has said "entitlement programs" such as Social Security should be cut back or made voluntary. This is necessary since these programs make up most of the budget of the United States and the deficit cannot be dealt with unless we change these programs. Making Social Security voluntary for young workers raises several questions. Should it be replaced with the equivalent to an "Individual Retirement Account" of some type? This idea would be the death of Social Security as we now know it. Would this IRA be the equal to Social Security, in any case of disability of a young worker? Will there be some type of guarantee against "market risk" for this replacement IRA? How would this change effect low pay workers who might not be able to contribute much money to an IRA type of account? Social Security is a guaranteed life-time benefit, what happens if a person outlives their IRA account? President Obama has said Social Security should be maintained, but reformed. Among the suggestions that have been put forward by study groups are: the retirement age being extended, perhaps to age 72, the cost of living adjustment should be reduced or eliminated, or the benefits paid could be reduced. For many Americans, Social Security is the biggest part of their post-retirement income, it is the safety net we all use, so the effect of any changes to the program could have a huge impact on people's lives.

The Social Security and Medicare programs are called "entitlement programs" because people pay a special tax in order to be "entitled" to them. In the case of "Social Security" it is the "FICA Payroll Tax." This tax can be thought of as being the equivalent to an insurance premium. Under the present "FICA Payroll Tax" system, the person who earns $110,000 pays the same exact amount in taxes as the person who earns $1,100,000, or $10,000,000. Mitt Romney had an income of $21.6 million in 2010; instead of a FICA tax of $1,404,000 without the cap, he paid $7,150. President Obama had an income of $1.72 million in 2010; instead of a FICA tax of $112,327 without the cap, he paid $7,150. The actual FICA tax rate for the ditch-digger, garbageman, or teacher is 10 or 100 or 1000 times that for a CEO, corporate financier, or government official. Rather then making it voluntary or reducing benefits or delaying the retirement age, shouldn't we be talking about ending the $110,000 cap on incomes that are taxed, while capping the present maximum benefit, and maintaining the cost of living adjustment? Adopting this program would mean the system would be fairer since the tax would then become a defined flat tax for all Americans rather then the present regressive tax. The Social Security trust fund should be put in a "locked box" which is not used as part of the General Federal Government Budget. The new taxes collected would help reduce the budget deficit by relieving the problem with the Social Security trust fund in the future. Perhaps if the increase in revenue was great enough, the FICA tax rate could be reduced for everyone. However, neither Mitt nor Obama has suggested this type of solution.

Uninsured medical costs was the biggest reason people filed for bankruptcy. In response to the problem of millions of Americans having no health insurance and being unable to pay for medical care if they got sick; President Obama proposed and passed the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2009" (Obamacare). However, this was not a single payer system, based on Medicare, but rather it was based on a plan supported and signed by Mitt Romney in 2006 when he was Governor of Massachusetts. Both programs had individual mandates to require people without health insurance to purchase it from private companies, in many cases with financial assistance from the government. This makes no sense to me, why not expand Medicare to cover everyone. Why force people to buy insurance from the hodgepodge of insurance companies, each with their own administrative costs and policies, trying to maximize profits? The cost of this bureaucracy means that medical care in the United States costs almost twice that of any other country with a single payer system. Why not have the insurance companies offer a Medic-gap type and gold plated wrap-around policies? The government provides a safety-net floor which people can voluntarily build on.

Expanding Medicare to include all Americans would also be a benefit to Medicare; it will financially stabilize what is now the high-risk pool of the health insurance industry. A substantial majority of Medicare enrollees – roughly 87% have at least one chronic condition, and nearly half have three or more. The people covered by Medicare include 1) people age 65 and older, who are the most likely to have Heart Attacks, Strokes, Cancer, and other diseases related to age; 2) people who have permanent disabilities and receive Social Security Disability Insurance; 3) people with end-stage kidney disease which requires maintenance dialysis or a kidney transplant; 4) people with ALS (Lou Gehrig’s disease) which is a slow wasting away of the body. The common thread between both disease specific groups is, they are expensive to treat and there is no cure. By expanding Medicare to include everyone, you would be adding 10's of millions of people under 65, the vast majority of whom are healthy and seldom require medical care. These people would have the security of knowing if they did get seriously ill, they would be treated without the rigmarole of complex rules and regulations regarding pre-existing conditions, pre-authorization, and Coordination of benefits. Medicare would benefit from the inflow of low-risk money which otherwise would go to pay premiums to private for-profit insurance companies. Medicare spreads the financial risk associated with illness across society to protect everyone, and thus has a somewhat different social role from private insurers, which must manage their risk portfolio to guarantee their own solvency. Medicare is a pragmatic program that works and is supported by a vast majority of Americans; however ideologues would call it socialism.

To those who question whether I am a Republican, let me remind them, there was once a time when we were a "big tent" party. I believe in "State Rights" in regards to the "social issues." These "social issues" - abortion, same-sex marriage, medical use of marijuana - are issues of differing cultures and should be addressed on the local state level. No one likes a foreign culture jammed down their throat, that is why these issues are so divisive. Socially I am conservative, economically I am pragmatic. However, since I am not a woman, homosexual, sick, or very religious; the social issues are not nearly as important as the economic issues. I believe in smaller government only to the extent we had smaller corporations, since in many ways corporations have more control over our lives then the government does. Government power is the only counterbalance to corporate power, and at least we have some input into what the government does by our vote. We no longer live in a capitalist society, we live in a corporatist society. Therefore, I was spooked when Mitt Romney said "Corporations are people" and implied they should be given the same constitutional rights as citizens.

Those who advocate a new age of austerity, like the Romney/Ryan budget, will cite Greece with an unemployment rate of 22.6% and say Greece is a nation we are sure to follow if we do not tighten our belt and reduce government services. They also cite Spain's 24.3%, Portugal's 15.2% and Italy's 10.2% unemployment rate. However, what they do not say is that in each of these countries tax avoidance seems to be a national sport. As a Republican I can not support Mitt Romney because everything, from his refusal to reveal his taxes to offshore bank accounts in tax havens with strong bank secrecy laws, seem to indicate he is a tax avoider. I do not agree when Mitt Romney says that if he paid more taxes than were required, he wouldn't be qualified to be president. I think that if he paid a few more dollars in taxes then he had to, as I have done, it would be admirable. Mitt is a part of the problem, not the solution.

These countries have also had austerity budgets for a number of years, even as their economic problems have only gotten worse. Many economists now feel that, in fact, the austerity programs are the main cause of the economic problems.

On the other hand, economies in many countries are doing quite well, such as: Germany which has un-employment rate of 5.4%, Austria 4.3%, Norway 3.0%, Netherlands 4.2%, Switzerland 2.9%, Japan 4.1%, Australia 4.9% and so on. So what do they have in common, and what are they doing differently when compared to the United States?

1- They have Universal socialized health care, and while all their people have health care they spend a small fraction of what United States businesses and Government spend on health care.

2- They have Universal Education, which means you can get an education up to your PhD pretty much for free. This means their people are trained for the jobs of the future.

3- They have much higher taxes than in United States on someone making more than 250 thousand dollars, for example in Germany 45%.

4- They have more generous unemployment benefits than in the United States. This stabilizes demand when people are laid-off from their jobs.

5- They have a more unionized workforce than in the United States. The unions provide hands-on apprentice programs for training new workers in manufacturing industries.

6- They do not spend Trillions of dollars on a gargantuan military, and unnecessary wars, which drains their budgets and keeps needed infrastructure from being repaired and built.

So maybe these countries should be our models for the future, rather then Greece

Mitt's father established the precedent of presidential candidates releasing their Tax returns in 1968. He released 12 years of them, saying "One year could be a fluke, perhaps done for show, and what mattered in personal finance was how a man conducted himself over the long haul." When Mitt's campaign was asked to release more then two years of returns, it responded “We’ve given all you people need to know" and has refused to give out additional information, even as many Republicans requested. People, including myself, are starting to ask "What is Mitt trying to hide?"

As Newt Gingrich put it, “I don’t know of any American president who has had a Swiss bank account.” But Mitt Romney also has accounts in the tax havens of Luxembourg, Bermuda, and the Cayman Islands. The Cayman Islands have a bank secrecy law so strong that a person can be jailed for up to four years, just for asking about account information. Mitt's desire for secrecy is so great that one time he neglected to include a Swiss bank account on required financial disclosure forms. Perhaps, it was because the Swiss account constituted a bet against the U.S. dollar, something no presidential candidate would want to reveal. When asked about it, Romney’s campaign spokeswoman, Andrea Saul, said that the candidate’s failure to include his Swiss account in the financial disclosures were merely a “trivial inadvertent issue.” From 1984 to 1999, taxpayers were allowed to put just $2,000 per year into a tax-free I.R.A., and $30,000 annually into a different kind of plan he may have used. Given these annual contribution ceilings, how can his I.R.A. possibly contain up to $102 million, as his financial disclosures now suggest? I am not claiming Mitt engaged in money-laundering or any other illegal activity, I agree with Mitt that he may have never broken the law. If there is a problem, it may very well be in the laws, not in his behavior. As Mitt said “I pay all the taxes that are legally required, not a dollar more.” However as Lee Sheppard, a contributing editor at the trade publication "Tax Notes" said, “When you are running for president, you might want to err on the side of overpaying your taxes, and not chase every tax gimmick that comes down the pike.” Has Mitt Romney acted as a model for all of us, the way a president should?

Why is Bain important? We must not forget a major contributing cause of the Financial Crisis of 2008 was the filing of false or misleading documents with the SEC. This is no small matter; since 2009 the SEC has collected fines of over 3 Billion dollars for this violation from financial institutions such as, among others: Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse, J.P. Morgan, and UBS. Even if Mitt Romney actually left all operational control of Bain Capital in 1999, he sanctioned and acquiesced to the filing of false and misleading documents with the SEC until 2002. While this violation may not rise to the level of these other institutions, it does indicate a certain attitude towards these filings: The complete and truthful disclosure of all facts is not important. This was an attitude all too prevalent in the financial community prior to 2009, and all of us paid the price.

Is full disclosure to the SEC one of the regulations Mitt would do away with? What about other regulations overseeing the financial community; Wall Street and the banks too big to fail? If you put a fox in charge of the chicken coop, you have a problem for the chickens. Will Mitt's election be the equivalent of that for the small investor? As a small investor, and businessman, I can not take that chance; I have been burnt once by a government that did not believe in regulation, and was asleep at the wheel. The sad thing is that Bain was first brought up by a candidate who wanted to colonize the moon, and the false filing was never mentioned. If this was discovered earlier, I would not have supported Mitt in the primaries and Republicans may have had a different candidate. Perjury is perjury. It was ethically and morally equal to saying "I never had sex with that woman" only worse since it was related to a public institution, not sex; and there could be no equivocation since the two official documents Mitt signed exactly contradict each other 100%. He can not flip-flop between these two documents.

Mitt has said “I would like to have campaign spending limits”, however his most recent position is “the American people (and corporations) should be free to advocate for their candidates and their positions without burdensome limitations.” The necessity of spending limits became apparent during the Republican primaries. The ability of one candidate to outspend his rivals by 5, 6, 7, 10 times distorts the electoral system. Good men could be destroyed by a barrage of false negative ads, and lack the ability to fight back. It is no longer a level playing field where the best man emerges victorious. Do we want a system where it is possible to indirectly buy elective office?

These are the reasons that for the first time in my life, I will be voting against a Republican candidate for president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 05:10 AM

4. Welcome.

You make a lot of points in your post and I'm sure it hurts to see how much your party sucks now. I am confused on one thing...you were ok with McCain/Palin?

Oh and we wouldn't have quite as many problems (we being the little people) if Reagan hadn't been such a union busting asshole.

Julie

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JNelson6563 (Reply #4)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 01:50 AM

43. Why this letter

 

I am a Republican who is upset at the direction my party has taken, and McCain was a "Moderate Republican" in the past. We were fighting for the soul of our party, and I thought Palin was just a bone thrown to the crazies in my party. I am a social conservative, but an economic liberal. I have tried to post this letter at Republican blogs and it is always taken down. I hope this letter gives moderates the courage to help take back my party. We need a center-left and center-right political parties, not parties on the extremes. I believe Obama is center-left , but my party is now right-wing crazies, that will comprise on nothing. Since I do not have millions of dollars to get my message out, I must rely on democrats. They have friends who are also republicans. If you feel this letter has any value you have my permission to cut and paste it into a eMail that you can send to 5 or more friends or acquaintances, and then ask these friends to send it to 5 others and continue the process, like a chain letter. We may not have millions of dollars to get a message out, but we all have 5 friends. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 06:40 AM

7. Welcome to DU

Thank you so much for voting for the President and for the extensive thought you put into your decision.

Honestly in a different place and time I would have been a Republican - Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt or Eisenhower? Who among them would recognize with their party has become in 2012.

I really hope the GOP gets its sanity back, it's like any moderate gets booted out by the radicals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to K8-EEE (Reply #7)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 01:58 AM

44. Thank you

 

I have tried to post this letter at Republican blogs and it is always taken down. I hope this letter gives moderates the courage to help take back my party. We need a center-left and center-right political parties, not parties on the extremes. I believe Obama is center-left , but my party is now right-wing crazies, that will comprise on nothing. Since I do not have millions of dollars to get my message out, I must rely on democrats. They have friends who are also republicans. If you feel this letter has any value you have my permission to cut and paste it into a eMail that you can send to 5 or more friends or acquaintances, and then ask these friends to send it to 5 others and continue the process, like a chain letter. We may not have millions of dollars to get a message out, but we all have 5 friends. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 07:06 AM

8. Here you go, I posted this as its own OP here:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CJCRANE (Reply #8)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 07:28 AM

11. Oh duh, you had a better idea, see post #10 below.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CJCRANE (Reply #8)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 05:39 AM

51. Thank you

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 07:21 AM

10. Welcome to DU!

I too was a long time Republican until the Tea party took over the GOP. It sickened me and I started lurking in here for like 2 or 3 years and joined DU last fall. The more I learned about the Dems, the more I became enthusiastic for their ideals. I have since learned that President Obama has done quite a good job despite the roadblocks put up by the GOP. The recovery would be, I believe much faster, if he had some compromise or cooperation from the GOP. The GOP no longer has the public interests in mind being too busy with trying to make Obama a one termer. It's why the Congress has the lowest opinion rating ever. I'm now reading a new book called "The New New Deal" and it's quite revealing. If you have a few more posts (I think 20 or so, not sure) you really should start a thread with your post. Welcome to DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 07:44 AM

13. Your post was so appreciated & I wanted to welcome you to DU.

Your post was so engaging, when I finished reading it dawned on me that you had asked for help. I had to scroll back (cell phone) to make sure that you asked a question re: how you "send this to as many people as possible". Does "this" mean your post specifically or something else? Just wanted to be sure so that you get your question answered. There is a welcome & help forum that might be able to help once we know what you want to send.

Your post was insightful & demonstrated so articulately how paramount a well informed electorate is.

Thanks for the post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Astazia (Reply #13)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 04:33 AM

46. Welcome to DU to you, too, Astazia!



Glad you're here! We need you!


Now get to work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 08:20 AM

14. Except for the anti equality and anti Choice 'State's Right's' bullshit...

 

it's a cool story. Too bad this poster is probably still voting GOP down ticket, as they are against or apathetic to any rights that are not their own, and that is a basic Republican personality trait.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #14)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 09:53 AM

20. People views on social issues can often be changed through education

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 08:51 AM

15. Please post this on the Obama campaign web site

Also, if you want even more visibility, go and post it on other left-leaning sites, such as Daily Kos.

And thank you for your post, thoughtful, wonderful, and it gives me hope.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 09:16 AM

16. welcome to DU

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 09:23 AM

17. hooray... good start here

"...It is no longer a level playing field where the best man emerges victorious..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 09:33 AM

18. Welcome and thanks! One question, though:

Where did you get statistics that say Germany has universal health insurance, 5.4% unemployment or taxes of 45% on incomes above $250,000?

Here is a chart from Germany that shows it DOWN to 7%, which is a miracle in itself, and one that will shoot skyward if Greece and/or Spain leaves the euro: http://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/1224/umfrage/arbeitslosenquote-in-deutschland-seit-1995/

Secondly, my daughter, a dual citizen, works in Germany, earns a gross salary if 110,000 euros (about $135,000) and already pays 50% in taxes.

Lastly, as my wife is a German social worker, and has had cancer, I can tell you that while the German patchwork system of health insurance covers nearly everyone, it is a cumbersome mosaic of companies that lets people through the cracks if they don't take an active role in seeking insurance. France DOES have universal health coverage--not the same.

One thing most European countries DO have is election campaign spending limits. If we had that, Rolls-Ryan would have conceded the election already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #18)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 11:13 PM

37. German unemployment

As I understand it, Germany factors part time workers who want full time work in to their unemployment figures. The US doesn't. I don't know where the poster's data came from, but 5.4% is probably reasonably accurate if the point is an apples to apples comparison with US figures.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PETRUS (Reply #37)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:21 AM

39. Most Germans would dispute that

But they do have a system where workers are on perpetual 6 month "trial" periods so that their employers can ditch them with no questions asked if either economics or personalities don't play out. My wife, as a German social worker, would laugh at a suggestion of a 5.4% unemployment rate. She would have been twiddling her thumbs had that been anywhere near the case. Instead, she worked ten hours a day (area of work--placing unemployed back into the workforce or into retraining) in a job that only paid her for five.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #39)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 01:06 AM

41. That doesn't surprise me.

US unemployment statistics understate the problem, too. My point is that the calculation is different; applying the American method to the same batch of data will almost always produce a lower number than the German way. So comparing US and German figures honestly requires adjustments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 09:51 AM

19. Your post was very honest and well written

Welcome to DU

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 12:03 PM

21. I admire your your change of heart and expecially the reasons for it are why 90% of democrats

are democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 12:30 PM

22. Welcome to DU...

thank you for being candid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 12:38 PM

23. k&r eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 03:41 PM

25. Here is another home for you sir.

http://www.republicansforobama.org/

Not pushing you away, just offering up a link where your words will be enthusiastically welcomed. Btw Your post was inspiring. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 03:59 PM

26. Well

 

If you could reduce that to 500 words or less, it might have more impact. I still don't know why you would vote for Palin - and call yourself an old Republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ann--- (Reply #26)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 06:29 PM

27. I think the fact that he has put so much thought and effort

into writing this is what gives it its impact.

I'm sure he's articulated the thoughts of many unhappy Republicans who are grateful he's taken the time to really think things through and get his ideas written down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CJCRANE (Reply #27)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 09:15 PM

35. And he sums up so many thoughts of Democrats!

Thank you for re-posting this in GD, which is where I originally found it. I meant it, it really is one of the smartest posts I've ever read in any forum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NashvilleLefty (Reply #35)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 04:36 AM

48. Good to have you here, too, NashvilleLefty!

Welcome to DU!

Now roll up your sleeves...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ann--- (Reply #26)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 04:35 AM

47. Welcome to DU.

I wonder why anyone would vote for palin and call themselves ANYTHING.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 06:58 PM

28. Welcome

Finally someone else feels the way I do..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tophogbbq (Reply #28)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 04:38 AM

49. Welcome to DU! First post!

Good to have you here as well.

And now, get to work!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 07:36 PM

29. Well, I just found this post by a link from Facebook

You're off to a good start!

Welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 07:47 PM

30. Hell of a first post! Welcome to DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 07:49 PM

31. Excellent post.

Welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 08:33 PM

33. Cut, paste, and send to newspapers and blogs (especially those that lean conservative)

There is one typo...TRAP instead of TARP, in paragraph 6. I didn't notice any others, but you might want to double check. I wouldn't change a thing other than that. This is honestly and thoughtfully composed.

While I don't share your views on the social issues, I'm with you on the fiscal concerns, and am especially alarmed by the thought of corporate-owned America. For a party that has long hailed itself a champion of small businesses, the Republicans certainly have a knack for throwing them under the bus whenever possible. It's imperative that small business owners no longer allow themselves to be duped by this party.

Thank you for taking the time to post this here...It gives me hope.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 09:10 PM

34. WELCOME!

Please read my reply to the General Discussion OP that referenced this post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1140016

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 10:49 PM

36. Thank You for your Post

Great Read!! Thank You

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftGuy (Reply #36)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 04:39 AM

50. Another one!

Welcome to DU!

Glad you're here! We need you!

Now roll up your sleeves...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 11:29 PM

38. You and I both

I voted straight Democratic Party in 2010, and in 2012 I will vote for a Democratic President for the first time as well. Welcome!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 01:28 AM

42. Welcome to DU. I put your comments on my Facebook page and gave you the credit.

I hope it goes viral.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 04:29 AM

45. Hey viguy007, Welcome to DU, and thank you for a MOST excellent post!

Your arguments have tremendous merit.

And the saddest thing for you - and for ALL of us Americans on EITHER side of the political aisle - is that the Republican Party you knew all your life is NOT the one we have today. I don't know WHAT this horrorshow of a "political party" is that's festering like skin sores all over our country. My father would not have recognized this republi-CON party, and he was proud to vote GOP (even though he called himself an independent). We ALL are owed a functioning political system at the highest levels of government because we ALL are owed a functioning government rather than a government being eaten from within itself as though it were overrun by either cancer or termites - by a rabble that believes knee-jerkedly that government = bad. I wish we could ship them all to Somalia and keep the moderates here so we could STILL get something done in Washington like the adults our reps are supposed to be. Adults. Instead of ideological-nutcase adult-sized spoiled-brat infants.

I know you've believed in your party for all the right reasons (and I usually don't use the word "right" anymore, since the jackal-esque "latter-day saints" of the GOP have completely perverted the very meaning of the word), and for many years. I'm sorry it's finally left you. I know how bad I feel when I sometimes ponder whether MY party has left me, which I find myself doing far more frequently than I like. I sympathize. I imagine you think of the kind of Republicans from the days where "R" also stood for "respectable."

But Welcome! You are welcome here. It can get pretty wild at times, but it's because we all feel so strongly about what's going on in this country, and how badly the zealots are trying to lead us down into Hell. Glad you're here.

Now get to work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 01:40 PM

52. Not so fast everyone...

I ask that before anyone reacts negatively to what I am about to say, take a moment to really think about what I am writing. In short, this letter could backfire.

Dear author,
Please come forward.

To the rest of you, while this letter sends a powerful message consider this; it is quite possibly a well-written hoax.
It is quite possible that everyone sharing this is being used as a pawn.
Think about it - The author writes a 4500+ word essay yet doesn't offer a clue to his identity? Not a clue as to what business he's successful in...No glimpse at the economic conditions of his hometown... Yet chock-full of anti-Romney talking points and many opinions (Eastern European economic model, Bain Capitol, too much Military spending, Romney's tax returns etc, etc...) that hardly sound like a lifelong Republican who has just seen the light.
Incredibly detailed and well researched arguments yet other than 'lifelong Republican who voted for Romney in the primary,' nada when it comes to the authors identity.

Pardon my skepticism but if my suspicion is correct, and the letter turns out to be a hoax it's an incredibly disingenuous tactic that will do more harm than good *if* it's exposed after "going viral." If I am correct, this letter represents the sleazy tactics we all despise. If I am correct and the letter turns out to have been written by a longtime Democrat, the right will use it to portray the Obama campaign as desperate.

A new poster asking everyone to send this to 5 people...make it go viral... The same letter going viral on facebook with a photoshopped image from the 2008 campaign and every time an inquiry is pertaining to the identity of the author is ignored and and the inquiry deleted...
This doesn't add up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albert_Wentworth (Reply #52)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 02:14 PM

53. Thank you for your concern. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albert_Wentworth (Reply #52)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 02:16 PM

54. If it's a hoax

It's a thoughtful, well written hoax. Beats "gang members will kill you with poisoned perfume samples" any old day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albert_Wentworth (Reply #52)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 02:33 PM

55. You make some good points.

If it's a hoax it could be a classic Rove maneuver.

They could either discredit the minor inaccuracies, or discredit the source, as a way to invalidate the truthful comments contained in it.

It's a possibility, I wouldn't rule it out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CJCRANE (Reply #55)

Fri Aug 17, 2012, 03:05 AM

60. Gee, I'm hurt

 

But when you see my net post, all your fears will be gone. I gave him some of my history, but no details. Let me give you an example of what I've written. As logical as my first post was, is as emotional as this one will be.


"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." ... "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

These words were the seeds from which an exceptional nation grew; a nation where the people were the sovereign, not some king by divine right. A nation where people could pursue happiness within the framework of promoting the general welfare, for only this could establish justice and secure the blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our children. Only this is the United States' exceptionalism: We the People have the oldest democracy in the world, we can be tranquil in knowing that our government only gets its powers from the consent of the governed, and we all have an equal voice in what it does.

To preserve and protect this exceptional nation over the years, many good and brave men and women have given their lives. Now it is our turn to preserve and protect this exceptional nation. Not by giving up our lives, or carrying a gun, but rather like Thomas Jefferson, picking up a pen. "It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

There is a man, Mitt Romney, who is running to be our President, the leader of this exceptional nation of ours. Yet he seems to change his stance on issues depending upon who he running against. This is a Man who says that if he paid more taxes than were required, he wouldn't be qualified to be president. I quote Mitt: “I pay all the taxes that are legally required, not a dollar more”; "I'm not familiar precisely with what I said, but I'll stand by what I said, whatever it was"; "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt"; "I'm not concerned about the very poor"; "I like being able to fire people"; "Corporations are people". He has secret bank accounts in the offshore tax havens of Switzerland, Luxembourg, Bermuda, and the Cayman Islands. Mitt's father, George, released 12 years of tax returns when he ran for President, saying "One year could be a fluke, perhaps done for show, and what mattered in personal finance was how a man conducted himself over the long haul." When Mitt's campaign was asked to release more then two years of returns, it responded “We’ve given all YOU PEOPLE need to know" and has refused to give out additional information.

Does Mitt sound like a man of the people, a patriot, who would brave the freezing and starvation of Valley Forge, charge up Omaha Beach during the Invasion of Normandy (D-Day), or slog through the mosquito infested jungles of Viet Nam? Or does Mitt sound like he deserves the presidency thru the divine right of kings, he certainly has enough money to live like a king? As Lee Sheppard, a contributing editor at the trade publication "Tax Notes" said, “When you are running for president, you might want to err on the side of overpaying your taxes, and not chase every tax gimmick that comes down the pike.” What does this say about whose interests Mitt will be looking out for, if he is elected president?







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #60)

Fri Aug 17, 2012, 04:19 AM

61. Thanks viguy007.

It's a tough crowd here on DU, we like to analyse things from every angle. We've been burned before, so it pays to have an open mind about things.

Having said that, your writing speaks for itself, the effort and dedication you put into it shows through.

I look forward to reading your next piece.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albert_Wentworth (Reply #52)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 06:03 PM

57. You sound just like Mittens. Deflecting the message to "who is Harry Reid's source"

Didn't work for him either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Albert_Wentworth (Reply #52)

Fri Aug 17, 2012, 02:40 AM

59. Ok, let me tell you about myself

 

I was an office holder for three years in my college republicans. At the same time I was a member of "Young Americans for Freedom" (YAF) which was a Conservative political group. I was twice a delegate to the state college republican convention in Ohio, and once a delegate to the national yaf convention. I supported the viet nam war and volunteered for the draft before I graduated. However, instead of being sent to viet nam, I was sent to us army HQ in Europe, where I was document control. While the documents were eyes only, there was no way I was not going to take a peek at classified documents. This was what first started to open my eyes. I took a European out and backpacked around Europe for a year. By this time my political beliefs had moderated a great deal. I finished my education at a well known liberal east coast university. To make a long story short, I got involved with the micro-computer revolution early on, became a partner in a small software firm, which was bought out by a giant company. I saw close up how stupid large companies can be with their internal politics. I said good-bye to the corporate world and retired before age 50 to my tropical island paradise. I maintain my legal residence with my apartment in the states, but I spend a great deal of time here. I never changed my party registration because I am a social conservative, but an economic pragmatist. By the way, when I was young, I was a very good politician, I ran 18 campaigns on the local level and never lost.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #59)

Sat Aug 18, 2012, 09:11 AM

63. Hi, So I want to post this on mywebsite

Keepthis100.com .I get quite some traffic so I would like to put a name to the author of this write up to increase its authenticity

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 03:36 PM

56. Welcome to DU!



Great post. You were obviously never really meant to be a republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)


Response to viguy007 (Reply #3)

Fri Aug 17, 2012, 04:12 PM

62. I wish you would run for President!

Finally a person who is intelligent!

You Sir should run for President. Until you came along, I had yet to find anyone, Republican, Democrat, whatever that could really understand how we got to where we are today as a country and be able to explain it so thoroughly.

I have always felt that Obama was held back from doing more for our country because of the partisan politics going on. I did not always agree with everything he had in mind, but I greatly admire his tenacity to not be afraid to take big leaps and difficult challenges in face of a congress that should all be fired for their lack of doing their jobs.

/bow

Cee

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Original post)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 05:54 AM

5. Very good news. It's so good to hear this. Thanks, a lot. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Original post)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 05:58 AM

6. Not only is it more wired,

but they are out front with the offensives, and respond rapidly to changing events and attacks.
And they have grown a spine!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Original post)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 07:13 AM

9. This kind of says it all...

Facebook:

Barack Obama - almost 28 million "Likes"

MittWit Romney - a little over 4 million

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Original post)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 07:41 AM

12. I agree. And I hope that under the radar the Obama campaign is making and keeping

 

a presence in those "red states" like Dean has advised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Original post)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 02:06 PM

24. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Original post)

Wed Aug 15, 2012, 08:20 PM

32. But, but, Romney has a brazillion Twitter followers

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Original post)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:49 AM

40. My first thought was "No campaign is more weird than Romney's"

then I looked closer

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread