And President Obama spoke to 30,000 people in Wisconsin the day after his
debate. I'm sure we'll be seeing the screaming headline about that
here any time now...
Is the writer implying that more people are coming to a Romney rally than
before? And since we are dealing with Small Town America, can one say that
these are all Romney supporters who never expressed their support before?It's difficult to read a crowd. One should be skeptical about
forcasting support particularly when it comes "overnight". The
assumption is that if Romney doesn't do well in the next debate, from the
same logic, the turnout should be less. However, the Romney campaign may
inflate the figures just to lend a sense of a groundswell that may not really be
occurring.But then again, these people coming out may be coming out
to see what he will say today and hoping he won't change tomorrow.
Come on, guys. Obama was new to a lot of people 4 years ago. Expecting him to
attract 100,000 now is absurd. The fact that he's still able to outdraw
Romney says volumes.
kjb1you might want to read you oregon liberal papers to get comfort. your
boys are going down in a screaming flame of laughter. thank goodness their four
years are almost over. a pathetic legacy of lies, deceit, and cover ups. dems
better figure out what they are going to do going forward.
The last paragraph introduced a woman named Judy, but then referred to her as
Shelby, apparently picking that up from the name of the county.As
for the crowds, it's an interesting observation, but there are many factors
besides a decision to support a candidate that draw people to a rally,
especially at a school, or that keep them away.
Were the 30,000 who showed up to the Obama rally all given Obamaphones?That's about the only way they could get 30k to an Obama rally. This
administration, along with the help of the lamestream media has been inflating
the crowd numbers ever since Obamacare got passed and people could see how much
their taxes would be going up.Crowd numbers understandably wil be
huge now for Romney because we see him as the next president.
That's Friday's news. Today's news (Saturday) says that a
CBS/New York Times/Quinpanniac poll shows Obama still maintaining a "beyond
margin of error" lead over Romney, especially in Ohio, which Romney must win
to win the election.There's an old Jewish saying: "You
can't dance at two weddings with one bottom." I think that's
what's going to be Romney's undoing.
The President was able to use his community organizing techniques in 2008 as he
was an almost outsider taking down Mrs. Clinton from the prospective candidates.
However, he got many people to his football stadium type events for a variety
of reasons of hope and change. His hope and change was to change the system to
take away from the rich and give to the poor. That is what those people were
hoping for. He can't blame his problems on the previous administration as
he was part of Congress and he and his friends in the Democratic Party
controlled both houses from 2006 to 2012 when some of these problems happened,
some with the Congress making their decisions, not jus the Republican
president.Obama is good at blaming everyone else but himself. With
the Benghazi and border incidents, it is now that they just can't stop
everything bad that can happen.The primary mission of Marine
Security Guards at embassies is to provide security, particularly the protection
of classified information and equipment vital to the national security of the
United States at American diplomatic posts and includes a senior civilian U.S.
law enforcement representative. Where were they?
ute alumni Tengoku, UTRah, rah, shish, boom, bah!Let's have a little dialogue instead of one-liner put-downs. "Your
guy is lousy!" "Your guy wears combat boots!" "Your guy is a
loser!" "Your guy lies!" may work with the partisan crowd, buy
people in this thread seen your comments as juvenile and silly. You need to
back up your statements with evidence to support your position.This
is the problem with the DesNews editorial staff. They let this stuff through
because it supports it's position of being a Romney mouthpiece. Anything
"Romney" is good as long as it continues to promote the candidate
regardless of content.It would be nice if they would ask for a
little substance. Reading pro-Romney articles for useful information on the
candidate and his policies is appreciated. Reading trivial rah-rah jingoism is
The recent upsurge in people turning out at Romney political rallies has been
significantly influenced by the presence of Paul Ryan. He is the darling of the
Right, a total insider and very much in the pocket of Wall Street. He says the
things the Republican base likes to hear, and is able to deflect criticism by
the wingnut fringe of Mitt Romney with his having been chosen as #2 on the
ticket.Mitt Romney doesn't have the star power, as evidenced by
previous public appearances. But add Paul Ryan and you have someone of Rock
Star quality. The only difficulty is that Ryan has to rein in his ideas and get
in-line with Romney policy. Whether it's domestic economic policy or
social policy, these two need to carefully craft their message so that Ryan
doesn't upstage Romney.As Mitt Romney moves to the political
center in a weak attempt to emulate his father, Paul Ryan stands as a bulward
against moderation. Social conservatives still wish that the ticket were
reversed (probably wish that Romney had never beaten Santorum in the primaries),
but they will live with it as long as Ryan is there.