• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Who is the Washington insider?

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Romney keeps slamming Santorum and Gingrich for being Washington insiders due to their time in Washington and the earmarks they have recieved for their districts. BUT


“I am big believer in getting money where the money is. The money is in Washington.”

“I have learned from my Olympic experience that if you have people who really understand how Washington works and have personal associations there you can get money to help build economic development opportunities.”

This was a quote from a 2002 video of Romney during his run for Governor filmed by the Democrats so yes they have a copy and WILL USE IT TO KILL HIM.

Seems he may not have been in Washington but he had no problem using his contacts IN WASHINGTON to get money he needed for his state. So how is that different from using your Senate or House seat to get the money your district needs for economic development opportunities? :?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
Romney keeps slamming Santorum and Gingrich for being Washington insiders due to their time in Washington and the earmarks they have recieved for their districts. BUT


“I am big believer in getting money where the money is. The money is in Washington.”

“I have learned from my Olympic experience that if you have people who really understand how Washington works and have personal associations there you can get money to help build economic development opportunities.”

This was a quote from a 2002 video of Romney during his run for Governor filmed by the Democrats so yes they have a copy and WILL USE IT TO KILL HIM.


Campaign 2012
Voter turnout in primaries in both Arizona and Michigan is down from past


03/01/2012 3:36 PM

By Shira Schoenberg, Globe Correspondent


Voter turnout in Tuesdays’ primaries dropped dramatically in both Michigan and Arizona, compared to the last presidential election.

According to the Michigan secretary of state’s office, 1.21 million voters cast ballots on Tuesday, or 16.6 percent of registered voters.


That is a big drop from 2008, when 1.49 million voters voted, or 20.9 percent of registered voters. Those numbers are not entirely comparable, since there were contested primaries in both parties in 2008, but only on the Republican side this year. (Michigan holds open primaries, in which any voter, regardless of party, can vote in either primary.)

But in 2000, there were also no Democrats on the Michigan ballot, due to a change in national Democratic Party rules stating that the results of an open primary are not binding on delegates. (Nationally, incumbent Democratic vice president Al Gore was facing minimal competition from US Senator Bill Bradley.) That year, there were 1.39 million voters, or 20.7 percent of registered voters.

Michigan did not a hold a presidential primary in 2004. In 1996, the last time there was no race on the Democratic side nationally (and no Democrats appeared on the ballot in Michigan), the turnout was lower than this year - 11.8 percent or 745,800 voters.

Turnout was also down this year in Arizona, where 461,000 people voted in the Republican primary. The turnout rate was just 41 percent, according to the secretary of state’s office.
In 2008, there were 998,400 ballots cast in the Arizona primaries, of which 541,700 were in the Republican primary. Turnout among Republicans that year was 52 percent.

The race in Arizona, which former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney won by 20 points, had not been expected to be a close contest. But Michigan was hotly contested by Romney and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum.

The Democrats aren't going to have to worry much about killing Romney- Santorum- or Newt---- they are doing a good enough job killing themselves/each other...

They were commenting on TV the other day- that the big winner in these primaries and caucus's is none of the candidates-- the "Up your Whazzu" voters that are showing what they think of the candidates by not voting are leading nationwide by about 80% .... :wink: :(

They commented that in a state with 250,000+ Republicans- Romney won Maine with less than 2500 total votes .. :shock:

Sounds like "None of the Above" will again win the Repub nomination.... :wink:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Romney keeps slamming Santorum and Gingrich for being Washington insiders due to their time in Washington and the earmarks they have recieved for their districts. BUT


“I am big believer in getting money where the money is. The money is in Washington.”

“I have learned from my Olympic experience that if you have people who really understand how Washington works and have personal associations there you can get money to help build economic development opportunities.”

This was a quote from a 2002 video of Romney during his run for Governor filmed by the Democrats so yes they have a copy and WILL USE IT TO KILL HIM.


Campaign 2012
Voter turnout in primaries in both Arizona and Michigan is down from past


03/01/2012 3:36 PM

By Shira Schoenberg, Globe Correspondent


Voter turnout in Tuesdays’ primaries dropped dramatically in both Michigan and Arizona, compared to the last presidential election.

According to the Michigan secretary of state’s office, 1.21 million voters cast ballots on Tuesday, or 16.6 percent of registered voters.


That is a big drop from 2008, when 1.49 million voters voted, or 20.9 percent of registered voters. Those numbers are not entirely comparable, since there were contested primaries in both parties in 2008, but only on the Republican side this year. (Michigan holds open primaries, in which any voter, regardless of party, can vote in either primary.)

But in 2000, there were also no Democrats on the Michigan ballot, due to a change in national Democratic Party rules stating that the results of an open primary are not binding on delegates. (Nationally, incumbent Democratic vice president Al Gore was facing minimal competition from US Senator Bill Bradley.) That year, there were 1.39 million voters, or 20.7 percent of registered voters.

Michigan did not a hold a presidential primary in 2004. In 1996, the last time there was no race on the Democratic side nationally (and no Democrats appeared on the ballot in Michigan), the turnout was lower than this year - 11.8 percent or 745,800 voters.

Turnout was also down this year in Arizona, where 461,000 people voted in the Republican primary. The turnout rate was just 41 percent, according to the secretary of state’s office.
In 2008, there were 998,400 ballots cast in the Arizona primaries, of which 541,700 were in the Republican primary. Turnout among Republicans that year was 52 percent.

The race in Arizona, which former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney won by 20 points, had not been expected to be a close contest. But Michigan was hotly contested by Romney and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum.

The Democrats aren't going to have to worry much about killing Romney- Santorum- or Newt---- they are doing a good enough job killing themselves/each other...

They were commenting on TV the other day- that the big winner in these primaries and caucus's is none of the candidates-- the "Up your Whazzu" voters that are showing what they think of the candidates by not voting are leading nationwide by about 80% .... :wink: :(

They commented that in a state with 250,000+ Republicans- Romney won Maine with less than 2500 total votes .. :shock:

Sounds like "None of the Above" will again win the Repub nomination.... :wink:

Don't worry Oldtimer the ANYBODY BUT OBAMA ticket will do just fine if Chu gets his way and Gas prices hit $8 a gallon and he bankrupts the coal industry and sees to it the Pipeline is stopped along with all Federal land oil production. :wink: :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Romney keeps slamming Santorum and Gingrich for being Washington insiders due to their time in Washington and the earmarks they have recieved for their districts. BUT




This was a quote from a 2002 video of Romney during his run for Governor filmed by the Democrats so yes they have a copy and WILL USE IT TO KILL HIM.


Campaign 2012
Voter turnout in primaries in both Arizona and Michigan is down from past


03/01/2012 3:36 PM

By Shira Schoenberg, Globe Correspondent


Voter turnout in Tuesdays’ primaries dropped dramatically in both Michigan and Arizona, compared to the last presidential election.

According to the Michigan secretary of state’s office, 1.21 million voters cast ballots on Tuesday, or 16.6 percent of registered voters.


That is a big drop from 2008, when 1.49 million voters voted, or 20.9 percent of registered voters. Those numbers are not entirely comparable, since there were contested primaries in both parties in 2008, but only on the Republican side this year. (Michigan holds open primaries, in which any voter, regardless of party, can vote in either primary.)

But in 2000, there were also no Democrats on the Michigan ballot, due to a change in national Democratic Party rules stating that the results of an open primary are not binding on delegates. (Nationally, incumbent Democratic vice president Al Gore was facing minimal competition from US Senator Bill Bradley.) That year, there were 1.39 million voters, or 20.7 percent of registered voters.

Michigan did not a hold a presidential primary in 2004. In 1996, the last time there was no race on the Democratic side nationally (and no Democrats appeared on the ballot in Michigan), the turnout was lower than this year - 11.8 percent or 745,800 voters.

Turnout was also down this year in Arizona, where 461,000 people voted in the Republican primary. The turnout rate was just 41 percent, according to the secretary of state’s office.
In 2008, there were 998,400 ballots cast in the Arizona primaries, of which 541,700 were in the Republican primary. Turnout among Republicans that year was 52 percent.

The race in Arizona, which former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney won by 20 points, had not been expected to be a close contest. But Michigan was hotly contested by Romney and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum.

The Democrats aren't going to have to worry much about killing Romney- Santorum- or Newt---- they are doing a good enough job killing themselves/each other...

They were commenting on TV the other day- that the big winner in these primaries and caucus's is none of the candidates-- the "Up your Whazzu" voters that are showing what they think of the candidates by not voting are leading nationwide by about 80% .... :wink: :(

They commented that in a state with 250,000+ Republicans- Romney won Maine with less than 2500 total votes .. :shock:

Sounds like "None of the Above" will again win the Repub nomination.... :wink:

Don't worry Oldtimer the ANYBODY BUT OBAMA ticket will do just fine if Chu gets his way and Gas prices hit $8 a gallon and he bankrupts the coal industry and sees to it the Pipeline is stopped along with all Federal land oil production. :wink: :roll:


Some Repubs are now "openly" disagreeing with you....

Washington Post columnist George Will writes in a column this weekend that the 2012 presidential race looks like a lost cause for Republicans. He calls for the GOP to focus instead on retaining control of the House and winning the Senate. http://politi.co/zEmgeQ

“Romney and Rick Santorum… are conservatives, although of strikingly different stripes. Neither, however, seems likely to be elected If either is nominated, conservatives should vote for him,” Will writes in his upcoming Sunday column, obtained in advance by POLITICO Playbook. http://politi.co/bxxOpb

Another interesting comment- already apologizing for the candidate before they are a candidate :???:

Romney and Santorum are both deeply flawed candidates with a vision for the country better suited for the 1950s

If the long time Repub cult followers are already giving up on the candidates- how do you expect to convince the not so cultist followers and the 40% of the voters that make up the Independents..... :???:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
BTW Oldtimer

Remember this

Boehner has a drinking problem
About 266,000 results (0.13 seconds)



SO according to your method of proving something

Dems will lose big in 2012
About 177,000,000 results (0.37 seconds)

Obama will lose in 2012
About 259,000,000 results (0.22 seconds)


:wink:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
The Democrats aren't going to have to worry much about killing Romney- Santorum- or Newt---- they are doing a good enough job killing themselves/each other...

They were commenting on TV the other day- that the big winner in these primaries and caucus's is none of the candidates-- the "Up your Whazzu" voters that are showing what they think of the candidates by not voting are leading nationwide by about 80% .... :wink: :(

They commented that in a state with 250,000+ Republicans- Romney won Maine with less than 2500 total votes .. :shock:

Sounds like "None of the Above" will again win the Repub nomination.... :wink:

Don't worry Oldtimer the ANYBODY BUT OBAMA ticket will do just fine if Chu gets his way and Gas prices hit $8 a gallon and he bankrupts the coal industry and sees to it the Pipeline is stopped along with all Federal land oil production. :wink: :roll:


Some Repubs are now "openly" disagreeing with you....

Washington Post columnist George Will writes in a column this weekend that the 2012 presidential race looks like a lost cause for Republicans. He calls for the GOP to focus instead on retaining control of the House and winning the Senate. http://politi.co/zEmgeQ

“Romney and Rick Santorum… are conservatives, although of strikingly different stripes. Neither, however, seems likely to be elected If either is nominated, conservatives should vote for him,” Will writes in his upcoming Sunday column, obtained in advance by POLITICO Playbook. http://politi.co/bxxOpb

Another interesting comment- already apologizing for the candidate before they are a candidate :???:

Romney and Santorum are both deeply flawed candidates with a vision for the country better suited for the 1950s

If the long time Repub cult followers are already giving up on the candidates- how do you expect to convince the not so cultist followers and the 40% of the voters that make up the Independents..... :???:

Read this really slow Oldtimer so you can understand it.

A-N-Y-B-O-D-Y B-U-T O-B-A-M-A

The same vote that got Obama into Office will be taking him out, THE ANYBODY BUT VOTE :wink:
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
28,940
Reaction score
170
Location
NE WY at the foot of the Big Horn mountains
Mike said:
We need to go back to the 1950's.....................................

Wouldn't that be great?
The world certainly was a better place then.

I really feel I have lived in the best of times.
I dread thinking what is ahead for us if Obama gets another
4 years. Rumor has it he doesn't want it......hates his job.......
 

Latest posts

Top