Romney/Ryan

[PLOL]

Developing: You heard it on KidWithDream's twitter first.

[PLOL]

Tweeted this 8 hours ago, before anything officially broke.

Wow, starting to look more and more like insider trading to me. Could it be Romney/Ryan? pic.twitter.com/P8ia6xY5

[Gordman]

Yeah, I saw the activity on Intrade hours ago as well.

IMO sites like Intrade just seem so vulnerable and a prime spot for trading manipulation.

Years ago when it was Tradesports, I took advantage of the Bush/Kerry election day when exit polling in the afternoon pointed toward Kerry, but there were other factors that told me it was ultimately going to be Bush.

[PLOL]

I have no problem with people insider trading.

[DirtyB]

I have no problem with people insider trading.

That's begging for a Romney joke.

I'm not sure why I assumed Romney would make a smarter pick than Paul Ryan. I thought somebody on his team would have some fucking sense. I think we'll find out this Winter that Ryan was his 3rd or 4th pick, and that people with a legitimate shot in 2016 didn't want to be associated with a losing campaign.

Picking Ryan is going to put the spotlight on the budget he wrote- the most heartless, awful, and hugely unpopular thing the Republicans have dreamed up in years.

[PLOL]

There's worse picks out there. Romney isn't ahead and he knows it. He needed to not go with a "safe pick". Portman and Pawlenty would've both been worse options. Of course if he really wanted to gamble, I think Christie would've been a smart option. I would be surprised if multiple people rejected the VEEP spot. Accepting the VEEP spot is the biggest political no-brainer that can pretty much only help your career, even if your guy loses. I think Nate Silver summed it up nicely:

But I do think, for better or worse, that picking Ryan is a game-changer -- for better or worse. Variance +1.

[DirtyB]

There's worse picks out there. Romney isn't ahead and he knows it. He needed to not go with a "safe pick". Portman and Pawlenty would've both been worse options. Of course if he really wanted to gamble, I think Christie would've been a smart option. I would be surprised if multiple people rejected the VEEP spot. Accepting the VEEP spot is the biggest political no-brainer that can pretty much only help your career, even if your guy loses. I think Nate Silver summed it up nicely:

But I do think, for better or worse, that picking Ryan is a game-changer -- for better or worse. Variance +1.

People said exactly the same thing about Sarah Palin. This is actually worse. Palin just brought attention to how dumb Sarah Palin was. Ryan brings attention to how horrible and unpopular Romney's economic ideas are.

History does not support your statement that this will help his career. The only losing VP candidate to later win the Presidency since 1840 was FDR, who had the advantage of running against the massively unpopular Herbert Hoover. This actually really surprised me when I just read it- since 1840, only one *winning* VP has become President. That was of course George H.W. Bush in 1988.

[manowar]

I have no problem with people insider trading.

That's begging for a Romney joke.

I'm not sure why I assumed Romney would make a smarter pick than Paul Ryan. I thought somebody on his team would have some fucking sense. I think we'll find out this Winter that Ryan was his 3rd or 4th pick, and that people with a legitimate shot in 2016 didn't want to be associated with a losing campaign.

Picking Ryan is going to put the spotlight on the budget he wrote- the most heartless, awful, and hugely unpopular thing the Republicans have dreamed up in years.

Silly Silly Fool. I just hope you understand that you are another one of the simple minds that have been easily brainwashed. Since you have an IQ of about 74, maybe you should keep your idiotic opinions to yourself.

[DirtyB]

That's begging for a Romney joke.

I'm not sure why I assumed Romney would make a smarter pick than Paul Ryan. I thought somebody on his team would have some fucking sense. I think we'll find out this Winter that Ryan was his 3rd or 4th pick, and that people with a legitimate shot in 2016 didn't want to be associated with a losing campaign.

Picking Ryan is going to put the spotlight on the budget he wrote- the most heartless, awful, and hugely unpopular thing the Republicans have dreamed up in years.

Silly Silly Fool. I just hope you understand that you are another one of the simple minds that have been easily brainwashed. Since you have an IQ of about 74, maybe you should keep your idiotic opinions to yourself.

I like your style, new guy. The "you're a stupid doody-head" debate technique is a classic for a reason.

[SixToedPete]

Paul Ryan is a great choice by Mitt Romney.

Unlike, Obama's choice Joe Biden, who constantly pesters Obama to help him assemble his Happy Meal toy, Ryan is very intelligent.

Epic: Paul Ryan Destroys 2000+ Page ObamaCare Lies in 6 Minutes:

[PLOL]

There's worse picks out there. Romney isn't ahead and he knows it. He needed to not go with a "safe pick". Portman and Pawlenty would've both been worse options. Of course if he really wanted to gamble, I think Christie would've been a smart option. I would be surprised if multiple people rejected the VEEP spot. Accepting the VEEP spot is the biggest political no-brainer that can pretty much only help your career, even if your guy loses. I think Nate Silver summed it up nicely:

People said exactly the same thing about Sarah Palin. This is actually worse. Palin just brought attention to how dumb Sarah Palin was. Ryan brings attention to how horrible and unpopular Romney's economic ideas are.

History does not support your statement that this will help his career. The only losing VP candidate to later win the Presidency since 1840 was FDR, who had the advantage of running against the massively unpopular Herbert Hoover. This actually really surprised me when I just read it- since 1840, only one *winning* VP has become President. That was of course George H.W. Bush in 1988.

Do you think Sarah Palin's chances of being president in the future went up or down after being on the ticket in 2008? What about her national recognizability? Did that go up or down after being on the losing ticket?

[sonatine]

Ryan interests me but his indifference for the actual middle class might be the final nail in the coffin of the republican party.

Pretty sure hes either going to send Romney out in search of magical golden placards in the woods while he runs the campaign, or its 4 more years of fiscal romanticism with Obama. Which actually doesnt sound terrible to me, providing no banks collapse etc.

[bukowski72]

Ryan is the second best choice behind Christie (as long as there are no skeletons in the closet).

[BCR]

While I don't agree with Ryan on much, I kind of respect the straight forward nature of his approach. He doesn't bother with the " compassionate conservative" nonsense. He slashes and burns. I think his choice is problematic as far as the general, but pretty much any choice is problematic out of the Republican Party as they aren't presently in good shape. He'll struggle with independents, and he frankly scares the shit out of the older demographic as so much of his policy takes direct aim at Medicare and social security. He's probably not a good choice with the goal being actually to win, but if a miracle occurs and they do win, no one could say they tried to slide their agenda in under cover of darkness. Selecting Ryan is a bold statement, and it let's you understand their intent from the get go.

[sonatine]

Its a little confusing because all I hear about is Ryan's political/economic agenda and Romney's (hilarious) spiritual agenda; I'd expect the reverse for a presidential run.

[JUSTIFIEDhomicide]

OH HEYD A POLITICAL THREAD. I THINK PEOPLE'S MINDS WILL CHANGE IF WE ARGUE ENOUGH!!!!!!!!



PAUSE............................................. ........................................




























NOTTTTT

[sonatine]

really weiss?

you see a lot of hysterical partisan antics in here?

[sonatine]

and dont mention sixtoedpete, if youre still reading his posts no wonder youre raging.

[FR1GHT]

People said exactly the same thing about Sarah Palin. This is actually worse. Palin just brought attention to how dumb Sarah Palin was. Ryan brings attention to how horrible and unpopular Romney's economic ideas are.

History does not support your statement that this will help his career. The only losing VP candidate to later win the Presidency since 1840 was FDR, who had the advantage of running against the massively unpopular Herbert Hoover. This actually really surprised me when I just read it- since 1840, only one *winning* VP has become President. That was of course George H.W. Bush in 1988.

Do you think Sarah Palin's chances of being president in the future went up or down after being on the ticket in 2008? What about her national recognizability? Did that go up or down after being on the losing ticket?

Let me first say I'm not a Obama fan. I didn't vote for him and I won't vote for him in the coming election.

But I will say this...

Just because Sarah Palin became a household name because she was a VP candidate did not increase her chances of be elected president.

Yes her popularity went up, but it's illogical to think that because her popularity increased she now has a better chance of being elected president. Popularity (depending on whether good or bad) can increase or decrease any given candidates chances of becoming president. In her case it decreases it. Great popularity does not equal great chance of being elected president.

Why don't we talk about how pathetic it is that we have 300 million plus people in this country and these are the best people we can produce to run it?

[FR1GHT]

Why don't we talk about real issues like a lot of politicians major in political science. These people have no formal finance background. They are basically trained in the art of political theory (which doesn't work in real life) and how to be a used cars salesman. With that degree they aren't even qualified to get an entry level finance/accounting job, but we allow them to get into office and expect them to responsibly handle the finances of a city/county/state/federal government.