1. #1
    Blondie
    Blondie's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-19-08
    Posts: 2,823
    Betpoints: 73

    Election odds: Romney the favorite for Republican nomination in 2012

    Election odds: Romney the favorite for Republican nomination in 2012

    Yahoo Politics forecasts that Mitt Romney has a 65.6% likelihood of victory in the 2012 Republican primary. Fellow candidates Newt Gingrich's chances are declining, while candidates Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman have failed to gain steam. Mitt Romney's chances are attributed to his popularity in Iowa; a key state in determining who will ultimately receive the Republican nomination for President. Yahoo's figures are helped by prediction market data supplied by Betfair (SBR rating A-). Curacao based bookmaker Pinnacle Sports (SBR rating A+) has Mitt Romney as better than a 2 to 1 favorite (-221) to receive the nomination.

    Yahoo Politics:
    Gingrich's decline in Iowa is persistent and sharp, his possible routes to the Republican nomination increasingly limited. He has trailed Paul or Romney in each of the last 4 polls of Iowa voters (Rasmussen, ISU, PPP, Insider Advantage); in the last 2 polls, he trails both of them by a sizable margin. Contrast that with how things looked on December 12: prediction markets had Gingrich's likelihood of winning Iowa near 60 percent.
    To read about the 2012 Republican Primary, political betting odds or discuss the 2012 election, swing by the SBRforum Politics & Economics section.
    Last edited by SBR Cynthia; 02-24-12 at 12:48 PM.

  2. #2
    BigdaddyQH
    BigdaddyQH
    BigdaddyQH's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 07-13-09
    Posts: 19,530
    Betpoints: 8638

    The reason why Romney will win the nomination is really quite simple and easy to understand. It is called money. He has the most of all the GOP candidates. Gingrich does not have the kind of money that Romney has. Money buys an organization, and an organization means votes. This is why Paul is doing so well in Iowa. He is buying votes. Unfortunately for Paul, that strategy will fail in New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida. Gingrich can win in the South, but eventually, the big Northeast States like New York, and the Western states, like California will be too much for any other GOP candidate to overcome. A Top three finish in Iowa, followed by a win in New Hampshire, and Romney is off and running. One thing to remember. Four years ago everyone had written off Obama and McCain, and look who we got stuck with.

  3. #3
    Emily_Haines
    Emily_Haines's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 04-14-09
    Posts: 15,886
    Betpoints: 15296

    What the hell you talking about.............Ron Paul has picked up so much steam he is now the front runner. America is tired of these establishment clowns and Romney stands no chance to win.
    Points Awarded:

    prop gave Emily_Haines 1 SBR Point(s) for this post.

    Nomination(s):
    This post was nominated 2 times . To view the nominated thread please click here. People who nominated: prop, and SmackdownV

  4. #4
    gridiron guru
    gridiron guru's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-21-07
    Posts: 255
    Betpoints: 326

    We got "stuck" with a president thats trying to fix years of racist Republican screw ups and people think Obama can fix everything with the snap of a finger. Obama will win 4 more years

  5. #5
    d2bets
    d2bets's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 08-10-05
    Posts: 39,775
    Betpoints: 21629

    Quote Originally Posted by Emily_Haines View Post
    What the hell you talking about.............Ron Paul has picked up so much steam he is now the front runner. America is tired of these establishment clowns and Romney stands no chance to win.
    What they're talking about is the market says Romney is the frontrunner. It's really not debatable. Paul is the frontrunner for Iowa, but not for the nomination.

  6. #6
    PhillyFlyers
    SBR'S Biggest Star
    PhillyFlyers's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-27-11
    Posts: 8,245

    Quote Originally Posted by d2bets View Post
    What they're talking about is the market says Romney is the frontrunner. It's really not debatable. Paul is the frontrunner for Iowa, but not for the nomination.
    This has yet to be proven. Ron Paul winning in Iowa changes things dramatically. What if Paul wins New Hampshire too? Suddenly, Romney is not the front runner and Paul is nationally at that point.

  7. #7
    d2bets
    d2bets's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 08-10-05
    Posts: 39,775
    Betpoints: 21629

    Quote Originally Posted by PhillyFlyers View Post
    This has yet to be proven. Ron Paul winning in Iowa changes things dramatically. What if Paul wins New Hampshire too? Suddenly, Romney is not the front runner and Paul is nationally at that point.
    What is yet to be proven? Go look at the market anywhere on the nomination. Romney is a 65-70% favorite. Doesn't mean he will definitely win. But it is proven that he right now the massive favorite. Simple as that. Thins are always subject to change. Gingrich fell from 37% to 9% in a couple days, so who knows.

  8. #8
    prop
    prop's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-04-07
    Posts: 1,073
    Betpoints: 2002

    mortgaging my house and betting on Ron Paul... I can't see too many ways he doesn't win this easily.

  9. #9
    HeeeHAWWWW
    HeeeHAWWWW's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-13-08
    Posts: 5,487
    Betpoints: 578

    Romney is pretty dull and uninspiring, but he wins by default. The rest are either nutters or hilariously inept.

  10. #10
    rocky502
    rocky502's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-13-10
    Posts: 486
    Betpoints: 225

    Quote Originally Posted by prop View Post
    mortgaging my house and betting on Ron Paul... I can't see too many ways he doesn't win this easily.
    Please post proof you are doing this. For once I would like to see someone put up or STFU when making an outrageous claim like this. So my challenge to you: Prove it or you can STFU.
    Points Awarded:

    Harmy G gave rocky502 1 SBR Point(s) for this post.


  11. #11
    apalm8
    Hello friends, Jim Nantz.
    apalm8's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 10-12-09
    Posts: 125
    Betpoints: 146

    Quote Originally Posted by blondie View Post
    election odds: Romney the favorite for republican nomination in 2012 yahoo politics forecasts that mitt romney has a 65.6% likelihood of victory in the 2012 republican primary. Fellow candidates newt gingrich's chances are declining, while candidates ron paul and jon huntsman have failed to gain steam. Mitt romney's chances are attributed to his popularity in iowa; a key state in determining who will ultimately receive the republican nomination for president. Yahoo's figures are helped by prediction market data supplied by betfair (sbr rating a-). Curacao based bookmaker pinnacle sports (sbr rating a+) has mitt romney as better than a 2 to 1 favorite (-221) to receive the nomination. Yahoo politics: To discuss the 2012 election, political betting odds and more, swing by the sbrforum politics & economics section.
    Quote Originally Posted by bigdaddyqh View Post
    the reason why romney will win the nomination is really quite simple and easy to understand. It is called money. He has the most of all the gop candidates. Gingrich does not have the kind of money that romney has. Money buys an organization, and an organization means votes. This is why paul is doing so well in iowa. He is buying votes. Unfortunately for paul, that strategy will fail in new hampshire, south carolina, and florida. Gingrich can win in the south, but eventually, the big northeast states like new york, and the western states, like california will be too much for any other gop candidate to overcome. A top three finish in iowa, followed by a win in new hampshire, and romney is off and running. One thing to remember. Four years ago everyone had written off obama and mccain, and look who we got stuck with.
    ron paul will win this nomination lock it up!!

  12. #12
    Harmy G
    cool story bro
    Harmy G's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-10-10
    Posts: 210
    Betpoints: 2262

    Mitt Romney's chances are attributed to his popularity in Iowa; a key state in determining who will ultimately receive the Republican nomination for President.
    Don't use a semicolon if you don't know how. In this instance, a comma is appropriate.

  13. #13
    andywend
    andywend's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 05-20-07
    Posts: 4,805
    Betpoints: 244

    Quote Originally Posted by gridiron guru View Post
    We got "stuck" with a president thats trying to fix years of racist Republican screw ups and people think Obama can fix everything with the snap of a finger. Obama will win 4 more years
    Gridiron Guru is colored:
    YES -10000
    NO +5000

    He whines about racism as often as your typical banana loving NAACP member.

  14. #14
    Romocide
    Romocide's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-14-11
    Posts: 1,404
    Betpoints: 3108

    If Romney wins the nomination I will slap myself in the face 30 times in a row on camera. How stupid can people be?

    Most people joke about how corrupt politicians are. Laugh about the fact that they are getting shafted every single day of their lives. And then will go out of their way to support the same people that are shafting them. It's amazing.

    Then a guy like Ron Paul comes along who wants to change that, and he's not already running away with the nomination?? WTF?? This is the first candidate in DECADES that has truly had the American public's best interests at heart. This guy is capable of saving this country. And I'm not being over-dramatic by saying that.

    Our economy is shit and what is the first thing that Obama does with his presidency? He spends 170 million dollars on his inauguration. Seriously? People are going hungry in this country. Then he gives 1 Trillion to his corporate buddies in a so called 'stimulus package' that didn't stimulate the economy whatsoever. He could have given every taxpayer in this country $15,000 with that money and I guarantee the economy would have been stimulated.

    Don't think I'm just bashing Obama. This is standard practice by every politician in Washington on varying scales. They are out for themselves. They are using their positions to make themselves wealthier. They don't give a shit about us. They **** us for 4/5 of their terms, then suck up and make promises they don't intend to keep for the final 1/5, and all the complete morons out there buy it hook, line and sinker. 500 rich guys making 300 million people their bitches each and every day. We should be ashamed of ourselves.
    Last edited by Romocide; 12-27-11 at 12:57 AM.

  15. #15
    golfrulz
    golfrulz's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 02-02-10
    Posts: 2,425
    Betpoints: 376

    10 Reasons Not To Vote For Ron

    Paul.

    1. Ron Paul does not value equal rights for minorities. Ron Paul has sponsored legislation that would repeal affirmative action, keep the IRS from investigating private schools who may have used race as a factor in denying entrance, thus losing their tax exempt status, would limit the scope of Brown versus Board of Education, and would deny citizenship for those born in the US if their parents are not citizens. Here are links to these bills: H.R.3863, H.R.5909, H.J.RES.46, and H.J.RES.42.
    2. Ron Paul would deny women control of their bodies and reproductive rights.Ron Paul makes it very clear that one of his aims is to repeal Roe v. Wade. He has also co sponsored 4 separate bills to “To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.” This, of course, goes against current medical and scientific information as well as our existing laws and precedents. Please see these links: H.R.2597 and H.R.392
    3. Ron Paul would be disastrous for the working class. He supports abolishing the Federal minimum wage, has twice introduced legislation to repeal OSHA, or the Occupational Safety and Health Act and would deal devastating blows to Social Security including repealing the act that makes it mandatory for employees of nonprofits, to make “coverage completely optional for both present and future workers”, and would “freeze benefit levels”. He has also twice sponsored legislation seeking to repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act which among other things provide that contractors for the federal government must provide the prevailing wage and prohibits corporate “kick backs.” Here are the related legislative links: H.R.2030, H.R.4604, H.R.736, and H.R.2720
    4. Ron Paul’s tax plan is unfair to lower earners and would greatly benefit those with the highest incomes.He has repeatedly submitted amendments to the tax code that would get rid of the estate and gift taxes, tax all earners at 10%, disallow income tax credits to individuals who are not corporations, repeal the elderly tax credit, child care credit, earned income credit, and other common credits for working class citizens. Please see this link for more information: H.R.05484 Summary
    5. Ron Paul’s policies would cause irreparable damage to our already strained environment. Among other travesties he supports off shore drilling, building more oil refineries, mining on federal lands, no taxes on the production of fuel, and would stop conservation efforts that could be a “Federal obstacle” to building and maintaining refineries. He has also sought to amend the Clean Air Act, repeal the Soil and Water Conservation Act of 1977, and to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to “restrict the jurisdiction of the United States over the discharge of dredged or fill material to discharges into waters”. To see for yourself the possible extent of the damage to the environment that would happen under a Paul administration please follow these links: H.R.2504, H.R.7079, H.R.7245, H.R.2415, H.R.393, H.R.4639, H.R.5293, and H.R.6936

    6. A Ron Paul administration would continue to proliferate the negative image of the US among other nations. Ron Paul supports withdrawing the US from the UN, when that has not happened he has fought to at least have the US withdrawn from the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. He has introduced legislation to keep the US from giving any funds to the UN. He also submitted that the US funds should not be used in any UN peacekeeping mission or any UN program at all. He has sponsored a bill calling for us to “terminate all participation by the United States in the United Nations, and to remove all privileges, exemptions, and immunities of the United Nations.”Ron Paul twice supported stopping the destruction of intercontinental ballistic missile silos in the United States. He also would continue with Bush’s plan of ignoring international laws by maintaining an insistence that the International Criminal Court does not apply to the US, despite President Clinton’s signature on the original treaty. The International Criminal Court is used for, among other things, prosecution of war crimes. Please see the following links: H.R.3891, H.AMDT.191, H.AMDT.190, H.R.3769, H.R.1665, H.CON.RES.23, and H.R.1154
    7. Ron Paul discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation and would not provide equal rights and protections to glbt citizens. This is an issue that Paul sort of dances around. He has been praised for stating that the federal government should not regulate who a person marries. This has been construed by some to mean that he is somewhat open to the idea of same sex marriage, he is not. Paul was an original co sponsor of the Marriage Protection Act in the House in 2004. Among other things this discriminatory piece of legislation placed a prohibition on the recognition of a same sex marriage across state borders. He said in 2004 that if he was in the Texas legislature he would not allow judges to come up with “new definitions” of marriage. Paul is a very religious conservative and though he is careful with his words his record shows that he is not a supporter of same sex marriage. In 1980 he introduced a particularly bigoted bill entitled “A bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955 A direct quote from the legislation “Prohibits the expenditure of Federal funds to any organization which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style.” shows that he is unequivocally opposed to lifestyles other than heterosexual.
    8. Ron Paul has an unnatural obsession with guns. One of Paul’s loudest gripes is that the second amendment of the constitution is being eroded. In fact, he believes that September 11 would not have happened if that wasn’t true. He advocates for there to be no restrictions on personal ownership of semi-automatic weaponry or large capacity ammunition feeding devices, would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act (because we all know our schools are just missing more guns), wants guns to be allowed in our National Parks, and repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968. Now, I’m pretty damn certain that when the Constitution was written our founding fathers never intended for people to be walking around the streets with AK47′s and “large capacity ammunition feeding devices.” (That just sounds scary.) Throughout the years our Constitution has been amended and is indeed a living document needing changes to stay relevant in our society. Paul has no problem changing the Constitution when it fits his needs, such as no longer allowing those born in the US to be citizens if their parents are not. On the gun issue though he is no holds barred. I know he’s from Texas but really, common sense tells us that the amendments he is seeking to repeal have their place. In fact, the gun control act was put into place after the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., and Robert Kennedy. Please view the following links: H.R.2424, H.R.1897, H.R.1096, H.R.407, H.R.1147, and H.R.3892.
    9. Ron Paul would butcher our already sad educational system. The fact is that Ron Paul wants to privatize everything and that includes education. Where we run into problems is that it has been shown (think our current health care system) that this doesn’t work so well in practice. Ron Paul has introduced legislation that would keep the Federal Government “from planning, developing, implementing, or administering any national teacher test or method of certification and from withholding funds from States or local educational agencies that fail to adopt a specific method of teacher certification.” In a separate piece of legislation he seeks to “prohibit the payment of Federal Education assistance in States which require the licensing or certification of private schools or private school teachers.” So basically the federal government can’t regulate teaching credentials and if states opt to require them for private schools they get no aid. That sounds like a marvelous idea teachers with no certification teaching in private schools that are allowed to discriminate on the basis of race. He is certainly moving forward with these proposals!Remember his “bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955? Guess what? He basically advocates for segregation in schools once again. It “Forbids any court of the United States from requiring the attendance at a particular school of any student because of race, color, creed, or sex.” Without thinking about this statement it doesn’t sound bad at all. But remember, when desegregating schools that this is done by having children go to different schools, often after a court decision as in Brown Vs. Board of Education. If this were a bill that passed, schools would no longer be compelled to comply and the schools would go back to segregation based on their locations. Ron Paul is really starting to look like a pretty bigoted guy don’t you think?
    10. Ron Paul is opposed to the separation of church and state. This reason is probably behind every other thing that I disagree with in regards to Paul’s positions. Ron Paul is among those who believes that there is a war on religion, he stated “Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view.” (( Koyaanisqatsi Blog: Wrong Paul Why I Do Not Want Ron Paul to be My President )) Though he talks a good talk, at times, Ron Paul can’t get away from his far right, conservative views. He would support “alternative views” to evolution taught in public schools (i.e. Intelligent Design.) We’ve already taken a look at his “bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955Besides hating the gays he takes a very religious stance on many other things. He is attempting to force his beliefs on the rest of America, exactly what he would do as president.

  16. #16
    Brooks
    Brooks's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 08-24-05
    Posts: 866
    Betpoints: 97

    ron paul isnt trying to force his beliefs on the rest of america he is trying to force the constitution. if we had kept to our principles alot of the problems we have now never would have come to be. good luck Dr Paul

  17. #17
    PhillyFlyers
    SBR'S Biggest Star
    PhillyFlyers's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-27-11
    Posts: 8,245

    Quote Originally Posted by d2bets View Post
    What is yet to be proven? Go look at the market anywhere on the nomination. Romney is a 65-70% favorite. Doesn't mean he will definitely win. But it is proven that he right now the massive favorite. Simple as that. Thins are always subject to change. Gingrich fell from 37% to 9% in a couple days, so who knows.
    These numbers that say Romney is the favorite are unproven. 3 weeks ago Newt Gingrich was a lock for the nomination and now he's sinking like the titanic. Newt even went so far as to say that he couldn't imagine not being the nominee at that point LOL.

    The numbers that say Romney is favored nationally mean nothing at this point. If Romney was such a huge favorite why has this process been such a dogfight? Why is he struggling so much within the party? It's because he's rightly not seen as a conservative but a liberal with an R next to his name.

    New Hampshire is supposed be where Romney wins by a big margin. Let's see how that plays out if Ron Paul wins Iowa.

  18. #18
    Romocide
    Romocide's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-14-11
    Posts: 1,404
    Betpoints: 3108

    Quote Originally Posted by golfrulz View Post
    10 Reasons Not To Vote For Ron

    Paul.

    1. Ron Paul does not value equal rights for minorities. Ron Paul has sponsored legislation that would repeal affirmative action, keep the IRS from investigating private schools who may have used race as a factor in denying entrance, thus losing their tax exempt status, would limit the scope of Brown versus Board of Education, and would deny citizenship for those born in the US if their parents are not citizens. Here are links to these bills: H.R.3863, H.R.5909, H.J.RES.46, and H.J.RES.42.
    2. Ron Paul would deny women control of their bodies and reproductive rights.Ron Paul makes it very clear that one of his aims is to repeal Roe v. Wade. He has also co sponsored 4 separate bills to “To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.” This, of course, goes against current medical and scientific information as well as our existing laws and precedents. Please see these links: H.R.2597 and H.R.392
    3. Ron Paul would be disastrous for the working class. He supports abolishing the Federal minimum wage, has twice introduced legislation to repeal OSHA, or the Occupational Safety and Health Act and would deal devastating blows to Social Security including repealing the act that makes it mandatory for employees of nonprofits, to make “coverage completely optional for both present and future workers”, and would “freeze benefit levels”. He has also twice sponsored legislation seeking to repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the Copeland Act which among other things provide that contractors for the federal government must provide the prevailing wage and prohibits corporate “kick backs.” Here are the related legislative links: H.R.2030, H.R.4604, H.R.736, and H.R.2720
    4. Ron Paul’s tax plan is unfair to lower earners and would greatly benefit those with the highest incomes.He has repeatedly submitted amendments to the tax code that would get rid of the estate and gift taxes, tax all earners at 10%, disallow income tax credits to individuals who are not corporations, repeal the elderly tax credit, child care credit, earned income credit, and other common credits for working class citizens. Please see this link for more information: H.R.05484 Summary
    5. Ron Paul’s policies would cause irreparable damage to our already strained environment. Among other travesties he supports off shore drilling, building more oil refineries, mining on federal lands, no taxes on the production of fuel, and would stop conservation efforts that could be a “Federal obstacle” to building and maintaining refineries. He has also sought to amend the Clean Air Act, repeal the Soil and Water Conservation Act of 1977, and to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to “restrict the jurisdiction of the United States over the discharge of dredged or fill material to discharges into waters”. To see for yourself the possible extent of the damage to the environment that would happen under a Paul administration please follow these links: H.R.2504, H.R.7079, H.R.7245, H.R.2415, H.R.393, H.R.4639, H.R.5293, and H.R.6936

    6. A Ron Paul administration would continue to proliferate the negative image of the US among other nations. Ron Paul supports withdrawing the US from the UN, when that has not happened he has fought to at least have the US withdrawn from the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. He has introduced legislation to keep the US from giving any funds to the UN. He also submitted that the US funds should not be used in any UN peacekeeping mission or any UN program at all. He has sponsored a bill calling for us to “terminate all participation by the United States in the United Nations, and to remove all privileges, exemptions, and immunities of the United Nations.”Ron Paul twice supported stopping the destruction of intercontinental ballistic missile silos in the United States. He also would continue with Bush’s plan of ignoring international laws by maintaining an insistence that the International Criminal Court does not apply to the US, despite President Clinton’s signature on the original treaty. The International Criminal Court is used for, among other things, prosecution of war crimes. Please see the following links: H.R.3891, H.AMDT.191, H.AMDT.190, H.R.3769, H.R.1665, H.CON.RES.23, and H.R.1154
    7. Ron Paul discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation and would not provide equal rights and protections to glbt citizens. This is an issue that Paul sort of dances around. He has been praised for stating that the federal government should not regulate who a person marries. This has been construed by some to mean that he is somewhat open to the idea of same sex marriage, he is not. Paul was an original co sponsor of the Marriage Protection Act in the House in 2004. Among other things this discriminatory piece of legislation placed a prohibition on the recognition of a same sex marriage across state borders. He said in 2004 that if he was in the Texas legislature he would not allow judges to come up with “new definitions” of marriage. Paul is a very religious conservative and though he is careful with his words his record shows that he is not a supporter of same sex marriage. In 1980 he introduced a particularly bigoted bill entitled “A bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955 A direct quote from the legislation “Prohibits the expenditure of Federal funds to any organization which presents male or female homosexuality as an acceptable alternative life style or which suggest that it can be an acceptable life style.” shows that he is unequivocally opposed to lifestyles other than heterosexual.
    8. Ron Paul has an unnatural obsession with guns. One of Paul’s loudest gripes is that the second amendment of the constitution is being eroded. In fact, he believes that September 11 would not have happened if that wasn’t true. He advocates for there to be no restrictions on personal ownership of semi-automatic weaponry or large capacity ammunition feeding devices, would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act (because we all know our schools are just missing more guns), wants guns to be allowed in our National Parks, and repeal the Gun Control Act of 1968. Now, I’m pretty damn certain that when the Constitution was written our founding fathers never intended for people to be walking around the streets with AK47′s and “large capacity ammunition feeding devices.” (That just sounds scary.) Throughout the years our Constitution has been amended and is indeed a living document needing changes to stay relevant in our society. Paul has no problem changing the Constitution when it fits his needs, such as no longer allowing those born in the US to be citizens if their parents are not. On the gun issue though he is no holds barred. I know he’s from Texas but really, common sense tells us that the amendments he is seeking to repeal have their place. In fact, the gun control act was put into place after the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., and Robert Kennedy. Please view the following links: H.R.2424, H.R.1897, H.R.1096, H.R.407, H.R.1147, and H.R.3892.
    9. Ron Paul would butcher our already sad educational system. The fact is that Ron Paul wants to privatize everything and that includes education. Where we run into problems is that it has been shown (think our current health care system) that this doesn’t work so well in practice. Ron Paul has introduced legislation that would keep the Federal Government “from planning, developing, implementing, or administering any national teacher test or method of certification and from withholding funds from States or local educational agencies that fail to adopt a specific method of teacher certification.” In a separate piece of legislation he seeks to “prohibit the payment of Federal Education assistance in States which require the licensing or certification of private schools or private school teachers.” So basically the federal government can’t regulate teaching credentials and if states opt to require them for private schools they get no aid. That sounds like a marvelous idea teachers with no certification teaching in private schools that are allowed to discriminate on the basis of race. He is certainly moving forward with these proposals!Remember his “bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955? Guess what? He basically advocates for segregation in schools once again. It “Forbids any court of the United States from requiring the attendance at a particular school of any student because of race, color, creed, or sex.” Without thinking about this statement it doesn’t sound bad at all. But remember, when desegregating schools that this is done by having children go to different schools, often after a court decision as in Brown Vs. Board of Education. If this were a bill that passed, schools would no longer be compelled to comply and the schools would go back to segregation based on their locations. Ron Paul is really starting to look like a pretty bigoted guy don’t you think?
    10. Ron Paul is opposed to the separation of church and state. This reason is probably behind every other thing that I disagree with in regards to Paul’s positions. Ron Paul is among those who believes that there is a war on religion, he stated “Through perverse court decisions and years of cultural indoctrination, the elitist, secular Left has managed to convince many in our nation that religion must be driven from public view.” (( Koyaanisqatsi Blog: Wrong Paul Why I Do Not Want Ron Paul to be My President )) Though he talks a good talk, at times, Ron Paul can’t get away from his far right, conservative views. He would support “alternative views” to evolution taught in public schools (i.e. Intelligent Design.) We’ve already taken a look at his “bill to strengthen the American family and promote the virtues of family life.” or H.R.7955Besides hating the gays he takes a very religious stance on many other things. He is attempting to force his beliefs on the rest of America, exactly what he would do as president.

    .......
    Last edited by Romocide; 12-27-11 at 12:19 PM. Reason: Nevermind

  19. #19
    HeeeHAWWWW
    HeeeHAWWWW's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-13-08
    Posts: 5,487
    Betpoints: 578

    Quote Originally Posted by PhillyFlyers View Post
    These numbers that say Romney is the favorite are unproven. 3 weeks ago Newt Gingrich was a lock for the nomination and now he's sinking like the titanic.
    Same pattern has occured repeatedly - new challenger zooms up, gets a lot of support from AnyoneButRomney people, then they fall away to nothing under scrutiny.

    If there was anyone vaguely credible they'd beat Romney easily .... but there isn't.

  20. #20
    PhillyFlyers
    SBR'S Biggest Star
    PhillyFlyers's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-27-11
    Posts: 8,245

    Quote Originally Posted by HeeeHAWWWW View Post
    Same pattern has occured repeatedly - new challenger zooms up, gets a lot of support from AnyoneButRomney people, then they fall away to nothing under scrutiny.

    If there was anyone vaguely credible they'd beat Romney easily .... but there isn't.
    The only reason Ron Paul isn't wiping the floor with Romney is because Romney is supported by big money corporations and Ron Paul has to depend on small donations from the people. If Paul wins Iowa, and thus gets the monetary support from the momentum provided by that victory, Romney's ass is toast. Also, the mainstream media is playing a part as well. If they were even half honest, Paul would be up 90% by now.

  21. #21
    HeeeHAWWWW
    HeeeHAWWWW's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-13-08
    Posts: 5,487
    Betpoints: 578

    Ron Paul can't win, too many implacable opponents in the Republican establishment. Threatening to run as an independent also rankles - no candidate who genuinely believes they can win the nomination would do that nowadays, it's basically committing electoral suicide by annoying so many (powerful and the base alike).

    He'd also be a terrible candidate: the contrast of being a poor public speaker against Obama's delivery, and too many policy areas to paint him as an extremist on. He'd lose very, very heavily, and most of the Republican faithful know it.

  22. #22
    PhillyFlyers
    SBR'S Biggest Star
    PhillyFlyers's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-27-11
    Posts: 8,245

    Quote Originally Posted by HeeeHAWWWW View Post
    Ron Paul can't win, too many implacable opponents in the Republican establishment. Threatening to run as an independent also rankles - no candidate who genuinely believes they can win the nomination would do that nowadays, it's basically committing electoral suicide by annoying so many (powerful and the base alike).

    He'd also be a terrible candidate: the contrast of being a poor public speaker against Obama's delivery, and too many policy areas to paint him as an extremist on. He'd lose very, very heavily, and most of the Republican faithful know it.

    First thing I would say to you is that he has never threatened to run as a third party candidate. In fact, he has repeatedly denied this saying he can't even imagine it. However, since he doesn't speak in absolute terms, he never rules anything out.

    The second thing I'd point out is that polls have showed that among all GOP candidates running, Paul does best vs. Obama in a head-to-head matchup.

    I also disagree with you about Paul losing a debate with Obama. I think the opposite would be true. I think Paul would bury Obama in a debate. Talk about Obama's record. Contrast his policies with that of Obama's and show the country the stark differences between them.

    Talk about how Obama's expanding of government has literally bankrupted us. His refusal to end the wars. Talk about how the troops that came home from Iraq are going right back into Afghanistan. Talk about Obamacare. Show that it's Unconstitutional.

    Talk about how Obama signed the NDAA act and how scary a threat it is to civil liberties. Talk about how Ron Paul has stood in Congress for over 30 years, often alone, in voting against every tax increase and every unbalanced budget.

    Ron Paul would be Obama's worst nightmare in a debate.

  23. #23
    durito
    escarabajo negro
    durito's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 07-03-06
    Posts: 13,173
    Betpoints: 438

    what does this have to do with sportsbooks and industry?

  24. #24
    Romocide
    Romocide's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-14-11
    Posts: 1,404
    Betpoints: 3108

    Paul would destroy Obama in a debate. Paul would have Obama so tongue tied that it would be hilarious.

    Obama is great against other politicians that play the same old light-hearted rhetoric game in debates. That follow the code that politicians have with each other in debates. Paul doesn't play that game. He lays out the cold hard truth. Barrack would be lost when Ron forces him to deviate from the script and get real. Because when you look beyond the layers of rhetoric and actually acknowledge the absurdity of politics and the government, there is no reasonable answer for it.

  25. #25
    rkelly110
    rkelly110's Avatar SBR PRO
    Join Date: 10-05-09
    Posts: 39,172
    Betpoints: 10576

    Anyone but a person from Texas. Learn from it!

  26. #26
    HeeeHAWWWW
    HeeeHAWWWW's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-13-08
    Posts: 5,487
    Betpoints: 578

    Quote Originally Posted by PhillyFlyers View Post
    First thing I would say to you is that he has never threatened to run as a third party candidate. In fact, he has repeatedly denied this saying he can't even imagine it. However, since he doesn't speak in absolute terms, he never rules anything out.

    Not ruling something out is rather different when you've a longterm history outside the party - he endorsed a third party candidate in 2008, didn't vote for Bush in 2004/2000 (and probably not GOP since the 80s), and publically called Reagan a failure.

    Most importantly, he actually has already run as a third party candidate for President in 1988.


    Regardless of whether he intends to do so again, it's pissed off enough in the hierarchy and the base to heavily limit his chances. Then you add on pissing off AIPAC, pissing off anyone who supports the drug war, pissing off a lot of military voters, etc etc etc.

    Too many enemies on his own side. Someone who speaks their mind may have admirable honesty, but it has electoral consequences.
    Last edited by HeeeHAWWWW; 12-27-11 at 05:11 PM.

  27. #27
    Salvan
    Salvan's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 11-01-10
    Posts: 93

    Quote Originally Posted by BigdaddyQH View Post
    The reason why Romney will win the nomination is really quite simple and easy to understand. It is called money. He has the most of all the GOP candidates. Gingrich does not have the kind of money that Romney has. Money buys an organization, and an organization means votes. This is why Paul is doing so well in Iowa. He is buying votes. Unfortunately for Paul, that strategy will fail in New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida. Gingrich can win in the South, but eventually, the big Northeast States like New York, and the Western states, like California will be too much for any other GOP candidate to overcome. A Top three finish in Iowa, followed by a win in New Hampshire, and Romney is off and running. One thing to remember. Four years ago everyone had written off Obama and McCain, and look who we got stuck with.
    The reason he has the most money is because big money donors think he has the best chance at winning. Not many people like throwing their money away by betting on a likely loser. Goldman Sachs didn't donate to Obama because they liked his rhetoric in 2008, they donated to him because he was probably going to win and they knew he would likely bring the hammer down on them.

  28. #28
    PhillyFlyers
    SBR'S Biggest Star
    PhillyFlyers's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 09-27-11
    Posts: 8,245

    Quote Originally Posted by HeeeHAWWWW View Post
    Not ruling something out is rather different when you've a longterm history outside the party - he endorsed a third party candidate in 2008, didn't vote for Bush in 2004/2000 (and probably not GOP since the 80s), and publically called Reagan a failure.

    Most importantly, he actually has already run as a third party candidate for President in 1988.


    Regardless of whether he intends to do so again, it's pissed off enough in the hierarchy and the base to heavily limit his chances. Then you add on pissing off AIPAC, pissing off anyone who supports the drug war, pissing off a lot of military voters, etc etc etc.

    Too many enemies on his own side. Someone who speaks their mind may have admirable honesty, but it has electoral consequences.
    Well, to be fair, you did say he threatened to run as a third party candidate when he didn't. What difference does it make? It's not a big deal. Ronald Reagan was a democrat before switching to republican. Who cares? The establishment can go against him all they want. In fact, I hope they throw everything they have at him because it only serves to make people support him even more. Already, this smear campaign by trying to paint him as a racist is backfiring as he has increased his lead in Iowa even further.

Top