Convention Highlights
 

Tampa Bay Gay Prostitutes Gearing Up For Flood Of Closeted Republicans

Helping the economy..:D


http://www.theonion.com/video/tampa-...lood-of,29263/

Glad to know some of the more prominent Dems will be profiting off the convention.

Barney!!!!

Was Larry Craig invited to the convention?..He'd have a ball there...or two.:)

"Eastwooding" Cartoons
 

The good, bad and ugly.

Continued
 

Yeah what a disaster the convention was, Romney "only" got a 5-point bump in the polls. I can't wait to hear all of those old angry, hypocrites like Kerry, Pelosi, Reid, and Biden speak next week topped off by that lying, idiot, hypocrite, incompetent failure Obama. Expect another 5-point for Romney after that debacle next week.

Candidates always get a bump in the polls just after their convention. It means nothing in the grand scheme of things.

They don't always get 5-point bumps and it will mean something if Obama falls flat next week.

SOP after any convention....Big O will get it back plus some after they lay out their plan to clean up Dumya's disastrous 8 years..:tro:

I haven't read everything down here lately by any means... it's very easy to get sucked in and I just can't let all this time go by defending what I believe because really... why bother (oh and I'm not insulting anyone who is down here a lot. Just for the record...) BUT the times I have looked down here? It's amazing how the people who are the most vocal Obama supporters are spedning all this time talking about the convention.

I mean thread after thread after thread...

Just seems kind of funny to me but what do I know.

I laughed ...you know a lot :tro::{>:

yeah, you're wrong:

'Gallup's data dating back to 1964 indicates that presidential candidates gain, on average, about five percentage points in the polls immediately following their party’s convention.'


http://www.economist.com/blogs/democ...08/conventions

:p :{>:

thepezdispenser will just say that's a Soros poll.

Both party tards have their typical dismissive retorts to facts. They love being stupid and controlled. Nothing makes them happier than to give up cognitive reasoning so they can have the opportunity one day to take a picture with their phone of their beloved candidate at a rally.

You aren't cool if you don't follow the party line. I mean...who in the hell is going to like your facebook posts if you're a crazy libertarian?

The five points is actually the median bounce not the average bounce since 1964 and it is all about momentum which has clearly been in Romney's favor since Ryan was named VP. It is hard to believe that Obama will recover those points considering that they are trotting out the same old, lame politicians who will be talking about the same failed policies, plus the August unemployment numbers will come out less than 12 hours after this clown Obama gives his lying speech right off of the teleprompter.

Actual polling from this weekend:

If you haven't realized it by now, there is no way for Romney to get to 270 without sweeping the board, including states already strong Obama. Obama chance of winning is about 75% at Intrade, and about 100% when looking at current electoral college data (that, of course, can always change, but that's today)

Regarding your little rant .. Obama Derangement Syndrome in all it's glory ... of course, every single Republican but Clint Eastwood read off teleprompters, including Mitt (who is NEVER allowed to go off-script by his handlers) - there is nothing wrong with speeches off teleprompters rather than notes. Reagan read off teleprompters. Both Bushes, Clinton, everyone reads off teleprompters.

Why the Obama-haters snarl about that is beyond absurd and hilariously hypocritical.

Especially when there are hours and hours of Obama talking without teleprompters or notes, and kicking ass (the meeting with House Republicans when his term first started comes to mind - that's why the GOP canceled and refused to have another one)

Speaking of "lying"? Paul Ryan was decimated by the press and fact-checkers for the outright, blatant falsehoods in his speech. As was Romney for a few things. One of the major headlines out of the RNC ended up being "lying GOP".

The Dems have their turn starting tomorrow. Don't confuse your hate with reality.

:rolleyes:

Gallup's data dating back to 1964 indicates that presidential candidates gain, on average, about five percentage points in the polls immediately following their party’s convention.'

ok, you deny there's a 5 point bounce, i show that on average there is, and now you're trying to say an average you denied is suddenly the 'mean' number. hilarious.
and no, considering all that's been going on, things aren't clearly in romney's favor. he's an unlikable, unpopular nominee, for an unlikable and unpopular party. the only reason he's at all close in the polls is that things are not exactly going well in the country at present.
as for the teleprompter comment above, all candidates use them.

*That about covers it...except he's good looking...and no, i am not gay..:)

**He used a teleprompter when he was sworn in, so say the repukes..
btw, he had to retake the oath because of Roberts mistake...:)

:tro:

If you are going to use your average bounce theory then you need to look deeper into it instead of just throwing those lines out. In more than a few instances, the VP candidate was named going into the convention so the so-called post-convention also included the VP naming bump whereas Ryan was named well in advance of the convention.

Obviously I know all politicians use teleprompters, it is how stupid and uninformed Obama sounds when he doesn't use it. His alleged super intelligence is just another media creation. It will be fun watching him try to defend his record during the debates.

Everyone is talking about Romney's likability, what about Obama's? What is so appealing about an elitist, divisive, lying, uncompromising, corrupt fool like Obama?

wait, you deny that the bump is typical, and then say others need to look into it? gimme a break. moving on...

as for likability-i couldn't care less about 'likability'. of course others may, but it really doesn't mean squat.
romney is a crappy candidate. obama is a crappy president. if you think romney is an improvement, i would have to completely disagree. imo, romney would be worse when one takes into account his thoughts on taxes, banking regs, defense spending and the like.

how would romney possibly implementing his ideas on those items be a step in the right direction? rather than discuss teleprompters and perceived intelligence, let's talk about the actual things that matter.
do you agree with romney on those key issues i mentioned? do you feel the banks should have less regulations, keeping in mind the current situation and how it came about with banks and deregulation?
do you feel defense needs a larger budget?
do you think the very rich need more tax breaks?

When someone talks about getting the defecit under control, cutting taxes and in the next sentence about entering conflict in Syria and Iran and increasing the military budget it should throw up all kinds of red flags as the basic math makes no sense whatsoever.

thelotiondispenser is going to be A.W.O.L after the polls slap him upside the head repeatedly this weekend.

Not to worry, he'll get right back to fluffing them polls.

yep, i agree completely. but some here don't care about any of that, they just want a change-but imo it would be a change for the worse.

Danzig, the Republicans are an unpopular party??? As opposed to the popular Democrats??? Have you been in this country the last four years? Were you in a cocoon in November of 2010??? Do you think it is normal for a challenger to be tied with the incumbent 2 months before the election? Even Carter was still 4 points ahead of Reagan at this same point in 1980.

If you want a repeat of the last four years as Obama makes moe executive branch power grabs while exerting more power over your life then go ahead and vote Obama.

Who needs to fluff polls? Who even cares about the polls right now? This election is a reprise of 1980. Libtards like Riot thought that Carter would win that election right up until election day. But the fact of the matter is that Obama has been a colossal failure and is clearly in over his head.

Many Democrats won't come out and say it, but when it comes time to pull the lever, they will not be able to bring themselves to vote for four more years of taking this country into the $hitter. Obama has run the most divisive campaign of an incumbant that I can remember, he can only attempt to malign his opposition because he cannot support his positions.

Watching these diehard Obama fans think they even have a snowballs chance is humerous and it will be funny when he gets the same type of trouncing on election night that Carter did, when Americans come to realize that regardless of what Romney offers it has to be better than what the fool who is currently President offers and that he needs to be shoved off into history just like Carter so we can debate who was the worst President in this country's history, Carter or Obama. Personally, I am leaning to the latter.

That is exactly the change that we got four years ago, change for the worse. People now need hope, which Obama did not bring, and change, change from the failed policies he has and wants to implement. Most will realize that whatever Romney does, it cannot be worse than what Obama has done.

Wise-up, not even close...This clown will forever hold that ignoble title..

He is not even in the debate. You really need to get over George Bush, these are Obama's colossal failures now. Time to wake up, it is 2012.

Yeah, you guys desperately want to sweep him out with the other trash...
Big O needs at least 4 more years to cleanse us of Dumya's stench and aftermath...Did you notice not one mention of the dummy at the convention..SS had him locked up at the ranch.:D.Even his Dad was no show.

No, we need to sweep Obama out with the trash. I don't live in the past like you, I am looking towards the future. The blame Bush card has been vastly overplayed and is not working. You better go back to the liberal playbook and look for something else.

ROR, that's funny...you don't live in the past, what was the last 4 years?..the present?..all you talk about is the last 4 years..if you only live in the future then give Obama another 4 to clean up....:D

You really are dumb. The past four years are the primary facts relevant to Obama's qualifications, dolt. What happened before him are not.

President's are given four year terms so they have their chance to make their impact on the country, after 4 years the problems that persist in the country fall on the current President, not their predecessor. Of course, third graders understand this, yet I have to explain it to you.

So tell me smarty pants ambulance chaser, a 11 year war in Afgan and 8 year war in Iraq started by that idiot you admire, and all the associated costs -trillions- are all on Obama to clean up in 4 years?...yeah, sounds fair to you and the other numbskulls...pardon me but i have to get ready for the First Lady's speech...

don't forget your sock filled with baby powder

yes, they are unpopular. but the democrats are too. and as a dog returneth to his vomit, too many voters bounce back and forth between the two, as there is no viable alternative at this point.
but hey, thanks for paying attention to my posts taking both parties to task. :rolleyes:
as for the challenger-were romney viable, he'd be ahead by a mile. but he's not, because he's a lousy nominee facing a lousy incumbent. if he were worth a plugged nickel, it would show in the polls.
and no, i don't want a repeat. but i don't want things to get worse either. i won't vote for romney, but i won't vote for obama either. just like the last election when i didn't vote for either mccain or obama. and if enough others did the same thing, just think what could be accomplished.

i asked you some questions above regarding romney's stance on some issues, i don't suppose you're going to bother with those tho, right? because it's much easier to wail and moan about the current pres, and ignore all the potential pres has said, right?

i don't think it's gotten worse. it hasn't improved much, but i don't think it's gone downhill. but i do feel that romney would send us in the wrong direction. if anything, i think we're treading water right now. better that than to drown.
romney wants to remove the banking regulations-to what end?
he wants to cut taxes on the wealthy. why? note that taxes are the lowest ever on the wealthy-how's that job creation going?
romney wants to build the defense budget. why? it's already equal to the entire rest of the world combined in spending. what will more spending there accomplish?
then there's his and his running mates thoughts on women's health issues. i certainly don't agree with that.

i've yet to see anyone say anything about what exactly romney will do that's a good thing. what are those things? i would like some details.

i think obama has been less than what his voters expected. but i do not think romney would be an improvement. nor do i, unlike some obama supporters, think he's an improvement over bush. so much of what bush left us is still there.

no, not quite. james buchanan maybe...or warren g harding. maybe even hoover. saying that about bush is like saying zenyatta is the best ever. it completely ignores most of who came before.