Romney VP Pick Today 9AM

[trialedbyfire]

I'm voting Romney/Ryan, and the Paul Ryan pick kind of solidified that.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by CC1

How about rejoining reality? You know good and well that historically the Presidential candidate picks his running mate and the convention ratifies that pick with their selection. To act like it is something other than that is just not being honest. It has been a very long time since an unwanted VP candidate was forced up a Presidential candidate.

Why would you say I was being dishonest when that is the rule? It is true that the delegates usually go along with the nominee's pick, but that is the rule, nonetheless. That is why Ron Paul never would give his VP pick. He said he had not been nominated yet and was following the rules. And it doesn't matter about the argument of Paul winning or not. He still was following the rules.

[CC1]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Why would you say I was being dishonest when that is the rule? It is true that the delegates usually go along with the nominee's pick, but that is the rule, nonetheless. That is why Ron Paul never would give his VP pick. He said he had not been nominated yet and was following the rules. And it doesn't matter about the argument of Paul winning or not. He still was following the rules.

You are inferring that Romney is doing some new terrible thing by picking his VP when the truth is that is the way things have been done for a very long time. The delegates give the pick their stamp of approval but for anyone to say that it is normal for the convention delegates to pick a VP for the Presidential nominee is just not correct. Yes technically they "choose" the VP nominee with their vote but you know good and well that vote is to give their approval to the Presidential nominee's choice.

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by trialedbyfire

I'm voting Romney/Ryan, and the Paul Ryan pick kind of solidified that.

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by CC1

You are exactly right. It is a farce beyond sanity to suggest that requiring photo id's for voting is some kind of horrible burden on minorities intended to keep them from voting.

The vote is sacred and I want my vote protected from fraud by insuring people are who they say they are and only vote once in an election.

If someone can find a ride to the liquor store a few times a week I think that every five years or so they can find a ride to get a photo ID. Plus I am sure any number of civic organizations will provide free transportation for those for whom it might be an issue. All of the arguements against voter ID are laughable and bogus.

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

His statements on social issues seem pretty good. I might consider voting for HIM tho I would not cast my vote for Romney.

Unfortunately, one of several Obama voters here, via way of either voting for some 3rd/4th party candidate or not voting at all.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

Romney's only hope is Marco Rubio. Anyone else will be a losing ticket.

All Romney has to do is seem not as wicked as Team Obama portrays him at the convention and at the debates. Obama's numbers are against him. History is against him. 2010 was a foreshadowing of what Americans think of the direction of the country. Theyre mad about Obamacare. They're mad about Fast and Furious. Theyre mad about empty promises of job creation and low unemployment. They're mad about illegal immigration and no one doing anything about it. They're mad about gay marriage endorsement. They're mad about croney capitalism---stimulus money going Obama supporters. They're mad about Solyndra getting $500 million dollars and then going bankrupt. They're mad about $3.50 a gallon gas. They're mad that the Keystone Pipeline was blocked. They're mad about don't ask don't tell being altered. They're mad that this administration is anti business. They're mad that Obama's trying to change welfare reform. They're mad that he is in the pocket of the corrupt unions and the corrupt Chicago political machine.

Romney could have Pee Wee Herman as VP and would still give Obama a good old fashioned country butt whoopin come November 6. The election will be about Obama and the economy, not Romney and his VP.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by CC1

You are inferring that Romney is doing some new terrible thing by picking his VP when the truth is that is the way things have been done for a very long time. The delegates give the pick their stamp of approval but for anyone to say that it is normal for the convention delegates to pick a VP for the Presidential nominee is just not correct. Yes technically they "choose" the VP nominee with their vote but you know good and well that vote is to give their approval to the Presidential nominee's choice.

No, I am saying that he is still, by the rules, the "presumptive" nominee until he gets voted in at Tampa. Ron Paul is still on the ballot and it's against the rules for Romney to call himself the nominee at this point.

Right now, the delegate lawsuit has refiled after Motion to Dismiss without prejudice. That means the case has merit. The judge is asking for more information and said he agreed that the RNC didn't honor The Voting Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. 1971. They have also filed a Motion to Expedite in order to have the case heard before Convention. The FBI are in Arizona right now reviewing all election fraud evidence - 80 cases.

So, you might be all excited and feel warm and fuzzy about a Romney/Ryan ticket, but we know why he's doing what he's doing and why he is prematurely calling himself the nominee. He is trying to seal the deal before Tampa and before it hits the fan. That is why I call him ORomney.

I am not happy with how they have handled the primaries and, again, it may not mean anything to you, but I am against dishonesty in my own party. By the way this has all been steam rolled so, he probably will get away with his dealings that others were not paying attention to. It's very disappointing to say the least. I'm sorry that you don't care.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by BrokenSpirit

He'd lose if he had Ronald Reagan as his running mate. He stands no chance because he's so shady. The tax returns are going to be his undoing. The GOP knows it and that's why we see voter suppression laws in key electoral states. If he had a chance they wouldn't be trying to stop minorities, elderly and young people from voting.

Romney shady? Hahahahahahahahahahaha! If Romney's shady then Obama is the bottomless pit...

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

from ryan's wiki page



LOSER!!!!!!!!!!!

You're so juvenile.

You posted an ad that was proven completely false by both Dems and Republicans and you don't have the integrity to admit it.

Who's the loser?