So as the party out of power, they're making their case by telling how things have improved in four years?    Why not just concede the election then?  

Posted by The Taint on 8/29/2012 10:30:00 AM (view original):
I do have to admit though, I'd really look closely at Chris Christie in an election. I like his fire and his record for the most part.

Too fat.

Americans look down on fat people as undisciplined.   Never win a general election.

Posted by evil_twin on 8/29/2012 10:58:00 AM (view original):
So as the party out of power, they're making their case by telling how things have improved in four years?    Why not just concede the election then?  

Nice spin attempt.   I think it was how they managed to succeed with an economic stifling federal govt doing all they can to make people dependent on them.

HA! Obama is sending Tom Barrett to Tampa to make a speech. TOM BARRETT!!!!! Rejected three times by the State of Wisconsin when running for governor. He's the Democratic "rock star" from these parts.

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/29/2012 11:04:00 AM (view original):

Posted by evil_twin on 8/29/2012 10:58:00 AM (view original):
So as the party out of power, they're making their case by telling how things have improved in four years?    Why not just concede the election then?  

Nice spin attempt.   I think it was how they managed to succeed with an economic stifling federal govt doing all they can to make people dependent on them.

Is that why the one dude from New Mexico was up there saying he didn't get enough money from the Feds?

Posted by evil_twin on 8/29/2012 10:58:00 AM (view original):
So as the party out of power, they're making their case by telling how things have improved in four years?    Why not just concede the election then?  

Except when you actually compare how most democrat run states are doing that spin loses all credibility.

Posted by mchalesarmy on 8/29/2012 10:45:00 AM (view original):
A keynote in literature, music, or public speaking establishes the principal underlying theme


The Prinipal underlying theme is how much better their states are doing.
 
I don't see the confusing part.

The underlying theme of the convention is Mitt Romney and what he will do to improve the state of the union. When some of the speakers, including the keynote speaker barely mention the man it makes you wonder how much they really believe in Mitt. Looked like a stump for 2016 to me. If you look around at reactions from "pundits" around the country, you will see a lot of them agree.

Posted by mchalesarmy on 8/29/2012 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by evil_twin on 8/29/2012 10:58:00 AM (view original):
So as the party out of power, they're making their case by telling how things have improved in four years?    Why not just concede the election then?  

Except when you actually compare how most democrat run states are doing that spin loses all credibility.

Ha. Check out welfare percentage and which states get more than they pay in. Almost entirely red at the top.

Posted by The Taint on 8/29/2012 11:18:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/29/2012 11:04:00 AM (view original):

Posted by evil_twin on 8/29/2012 10:58:00 AM (view original):
So as the party out of power, they're making their case by telling how things have improved in four years?    Why not just concede the election then?  

Nice spin attempt.   I think it was how they managed to succeed with an economic stifling federal govt doing all they can to make people dependent on them.

Is that why the one dude from New Mexico was up there saying he didn't get enough money from the Feds?

One dude?  He's not even a majority in his state.   It's one ******* dude.    Are all Democrats Jimmy Carter?   Because that one ******* dude was a nightmare.

Most "pundits" are liberal tards.

So welfare is the real reason why most republican run states are doing much better compared to democrat run states?

Amazing!

Posted by The Taint on 8/29/2012 11:30:00 AM (view original):

Posted by mchalesarmy on 8/29/2012 10:45:00 AM (view original):
A keynote in literature, music, or public speaking establishes the principal underlying theme


The Prinipal underlying theme is how much better their states are doing.
 
I don't see the confusing part.

The underlying theme of the convention is Mitt Romney and what he will do to improve the state of the union. When some of the speakers, including the keynote speaker barely mention the man it makes you wonder how much they really believe in Mitt. Looked like a stump for 2016 to me. If you look around at reactions from "pundits" around the country, you will see a lot of them agree.

Well, I'd hardly expect Santorum or Christie to be cheerleaders for Team Romney.   They have their own careers and aspirations.   Both discussed issues important to the Republican party, issues Romney supports, and endorsed Romney at the end of their speech.    To me, it would have come off as extremely phoney if both spent 10-15 minutes recapping how great Romney is.

Posted by The Taint on 8/29/2012 10:30:00 AM (view original):
I do have to admit though, I'd really look closely at Chris Christie in an election. I like his fire and his record for the most part.

+1

Posted by mchalesarmy on 8/29/2012 11:40:00 AM (view original):
Most "pundits" are liberal tards.

So welfare is the real reason why most republican run states are doing much better compared to democrat run states?

Amazing!

Actually I was reading fox news mostly.

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/29/2012 11:40:00 AM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 8/29/2012 11:18:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/29/2012 11:04:00 AM (view original):

Posted by evil_twin on 8/29/2012 10:58:00 AM (view original):
So as the party out of power, they're making their case by telling how things have improved in four years?    Why not just concede the election then?  

Nice spin attempt.   I think it was how they managed to succeed with an economic stifling federal govt doing all they can to make people dependent on them.

Is that why the one dude from New Mexico was up there saying he didn't get enough money from the Feds?

One dude?  He's not even a majority in his state.   It's one ******* dude.    Are all Democrats Jimmy Carter?   Because that one ******* dude was a nightmare.

Well, it just seems odd that if that's the point they were trying to get across, they would let that guy speak.

Posted by mchalesarmy on 8/29/2012 10:33:00 AM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 8/29/2012 10:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by stinenavy on 8/29/2012 1:16:00 AM (view original):
So odd that Santorum and Christie hardly mentioned Mitt. Christie's speech seemed like a big audition for himself. If the fat vote becomes a voting block, look out in 2016.

Indeed.

Odd? The theme is how republican run states are fairing better than the dem run states. They weren't there to talk about Mitt for 30 minutes. They were there sharing the stories of the success they are having in their states in spite of Obama.

Nice fat joke too. I thought liberals were supposed to be tolerant. I guess that is only true towrds other liberals.

Santorum was there to talk to social conservatives, not some Repub successes. Chris Christie was there to talk about Chris Christie apparently.

There's no reason to be tolerant of fat people.