Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nadaka]

McCain used to be something of a "Maverick" as a moderate republican occasionally willing to compromise with democrats until he had to spin up doom machine to win the primary in 2008. His old political persona was more like Obama's current one than any of the republican candidates right now.

[RedKing]

Meanwhile, my gut feeling that somebody was going to slap the "Manchurian Candidate" tag on Jon Huntsman turned out to be right.

Care to take a guess who?

His campaign has disavowed it, of course. Just like all good campaigns do. Even as they reap the benefit on the ground. It's the exact same kind of slimy shit that Karl Rove pulled on McCain in SC back in 2000. The good part is that they did this in NH, where it'll probably backfire and give Huntsman MORE support.

[Sheb]

I really start to like Huntsman. Maybe it's only because of the contrast, but he looks like the kind of guy I'd vote for over Obama (Of course, since I hail from Belgium I cannot vote for your prez, but he's supposed to be "Leader of the Free World" and shit so I must pay attention to the guy.

Does he have his dark side as well?

[Sirus]

Well, I want to know the reason for those N/As on his scorecard. What do they represent?

[Mictlantecuhtli]

His campaign has disavowed it, of course. Just like all good campaigns do. Even as they reap the benefit on the ground. It's the exact same kind of slimy shit that Karl Rove pulled on McCain in SC back in 2000. The good part is that they did this in NH, where it'll probably backfire and give Huntsman MORE support.

Good. I hope these (S)PACs will take a lesson and stop trying to turn everything into a distraction. Maybe use a real issue as campaign fodder, as opposed to using fodder as fodder? It irritates me that they have the money to spend on an advertisement calling him out for adopting children that are happier and, more importantly, alive, thanks to people like him that adopt and don't go out of their way to have their own kids, further seperating the 'first world' populations from the less fortunate located elsewhere.

I wish I had millions to waste on a nil point.

I would spit on the producer of it. I bet Paul is pissed.

[Sheb]

The fact that whoever made the card couldn't find out enough data about him. It's easier to find stuff about religion and Santorum that about religion and Huntsman.

[Nadaka]

I really start to like Huntsman. Maybe it's only because of the contrast, but he looks like the kind of guy I'd vote for over Obama (Of course, since I hail from Belgium I cannot vote for your prez, but he's supposed to be "Leader of the Free World" and shit so I must pay attention to the guy.

Does he have his dark side as well?

He has the usual conservative dark side. Cut taxes for the rich, increase govornment spending (in wealthy owned businesses) and that god will balance the budget for you somehow. He is anti-choice and against the gays, but not as much as most of his competitors.

[RedKing]

I really start to like Huntsman. Maybe it's only because of the contrast, but he looks like the kind of guy I'd vote for over Obama (Of course, since I hail from Belgium I cannot vote for your prez, but he's supposed to be "Leader of the Free World" and shit so I must pay attention to the guy.

Does he have his dark side as well?

Well, he's Mormon. Yeah, I know that shouldn't matter and I'm a horrible bigot for thinking it does. Tough shit, it does. As I've said before, IMHO Mormonism is 19th-century Scientology: a con game that went a little too far and outlived its creator.

Beyond that, not much that I can find. These are some negatives according to RonPaulForums.com:

- comfortable with individual health mandates
- pro cap and trade
- supported instate tuition for illegal immigrants
- said stimuls not big enough [sic...I assume they meant stimulus]
- avoids his Mormon heritage
- says China not a threat

Oh wait, he avoids his Mormon heritage? Ok, screw it. I'm in for Huntsman. I'm sure I would find areas of policy disagreement if I really dug, but they'd be just that--disagreements. It'd be "Y'know, I can see your point but I think this would be a better alternative" rather than "Seriously? WTFBBQ are you doing?"


EDIT: Another con, courtesy of the same source:

Con: The mainstream media has been pushing him hard. Huge red flag.

Paulian logic at its finest.
Mainstream media: "More and more people are asking themselves, 'Hey this Jon Huntsman guy sounds halfway sane! Why haven't we heard more about him?'"
Ron Paul followers: "IT'S A TRAP!" 

Seriously....if occasionally remembering to mention "oh, and Jon Huntsman was also there" constitutes pushing him hard, I'd hate to see what they'd call Santorum's exposure now.


DOUBLE-EDIT: I don't mean to be piling onto Paul here, but checking out that forum just confirms my worst fears about his camp. Their initial reaction to this story is to blame Huntsman of running a false-flag operation in what must obviously be a conspiracy against Dr. Paul. Interspersed with this are banner ads reading:

"Support Ron Paul By Buying Ammo!"
"The Top 10 Things You Need To Know About Precious Metals"
"The Ron Paul Chocolate Bar Is Here!" (is every bar as chock full of nuts?)

So the base message is conspiracy, ammo and buy up gold? Is this Ron Paul or just Glenn Beck with a tasty treat?

[nenjin]

Notice how all the "I'm so and so and I approved this message" has vanished since the Supreme Court ruling? Political attack ads have always been vile, but at least we weren't in the position where candidates take money from SPACs, accept their ads, then disavow any of the values portrayed in them. While still taking the money.

I don't know what is slimier in my book. The ads themselves or the campaign staff who have to repeat the mantra of "this doesn't reflect our campaign and we don't know who did it." If it doesn't reflect your campaign, quit accepting donations from people you can't or won't vet.

How is any American voter supposed to know where a candidate stands when they say one thing and their ads say something different? And the candidates just get to float on by that little inconsistency, all the way to White House, or at least, a few lucrative book tours.

In Ron Paul's case it pisses me off the worst, as he desperately tries to shed all his self-inflicted baggage yet all the psychos he's drawn to him keep the fires burning.

[Aqizzar]

Rick Santorum is apparently a much more intelligent speaking than people might give him credit for.  As he does a lightning tour around New Hampshire, he's becoming famous for giving hour-long Socratic symposiums about whatever issues people ask him about, or about topics he gets by asking the crowd.  He has the intellectual bent and poise of a professor, much more so or at least more obviously so than the infamous Professor Obama we used to see.  He also has strong and remarkably detailed and well developed stances and explanations for just about issue you pitch at him.

His problem is, Santorum's ranking of what issues are important and who they're relevant to comes from another planet.  Touring around libertarian, economically obsessed New Hampshire, he can and does spend an entire hour in front of college students explaining why "Small Government" does not mean the government does not have a role in defining acceptable and unacceptable sexual acts, and indeed exactly why it should do so.  When asked about the unfair practices of insurance providers by a cancer survivor, he gives the academic equivalent of "them's the breaks kid" and wanders off into a twenty minute lauding the meritocratic underpinnings of premium calculation.

So he's an impressive non-factor in New Hampshire, and would probably be better served preparing for South Carolina early.  He raising exponentially more money than he was before Iowa, but it's something to $2million to Romney's dozens.  At any rate, for the first time in seven years, if you Google his name you actually get his campaign website instead of UrbanDictionary (it's still on the first page).

[nenjin]

Santorum 2012: From Ass Juice to the White House.

[Bauglir]

I would give so many arms and legs to see that become the official campaign slogan, you have no idea.

[Powder Miner]

I really start to like Huntsman. Maybe it's only because of the contrast, but he looks like the kind of guy I'd vote for over Obama (Of course, since I hail from Belgium I cannot vote for your prez, but he's supposed to be "Leader of the Free World" and shit so I must pay attention to the guy.

Does he have his dark side as well?

He has the usual conservative dark side. Cut taxes for the rich, increase govornment spending (in wealthy owned businesses) and that god will balance the budget for you somehow. He is anti-choice and against the gays, but not as much as most of his competitors.

Yeaaaaaaah no that's not what Republicans want. We favor a less progressive system of axes, with low for everyone, not "Oh goody our good buddies the rich people get no taxes everyone else gets 100% hurr." Also we aren't for spending government money in corporations.
Although Obama certainly has done that to a massive scale.
We believe that if you make it so that the government isn't spending every cent it doesn't have, then it'll help balance the budget.

[nenjin]

When the gov't is hardly taking in any money because everyone and their dog gets a tax break, especially corporations, it's hard for the gov't to do much of anything, isn't it?

I respected the conservative stand on the bail outs, even agreed with it. But I disagree that freeing business from any taxes and huge subsidies to support American industries that don't need it, isn't effectively putting money in their pocket, by refusing to accept any limitations on their activities.

But most conservatives I know think the gov't's job is literally to run our wars and the Justice department. Anything beyond that is an abuse of their powers in their book. I take the opposite view, that without gov't and its power to enforce change, we'd still be in the 1950s on civil rights, to name just one important function it served.

[RedKing]

Really? So conservatives, as a group, would be opposed to say...massive government subsidies to the energy industry? Or agribusiness? Or the financial sector?

Because that sure as shit ain't how they've voted.