And Then There Were Two

[Gregg]

Well, for practical purposes one. Newt is out. Ron Paul is still lurking, but not much else. It was interesting to watch Gingrich and Santorum cancel each other out by splitting votes.

Not a real Newt fan here (too much baggage), but he is definitely a big ideas kind of guy which was refreshing. Mitt Romney's campaign rhetoric is too vague to know if he can see the big picture or not. I'm hoping his experience in business, where you have to be able to see the whole thing to be successful, indicates that he can. We could use that right now.

[creaker]

"It was interesting to watch Gingrich and Santorum cancel each other out by splitting votes. "

I really wondered about this one - was Newt in to win or just to neutralize Santorum?

[iris lily]

I am glad that Paul is hanging in there, aligning himself with the Republican party. He's what the party needs.

[Gregg]

"It was interesting to watch Gingrich and Santorum cancel each other out by splitting votes. "

I really wondered about this one - was Newt in to win or just to neutralize Santorum?

I don't know Newt Gingrich, but he never struck me as a 'take one for the team' kind of guy. Probably not going to happen this round, but Santorum seems like the kind of guy who would accept a VP nomination. Gingrich seems more all in or all out in his thinking.

[peggy]

I sure was sorry to see Newt go. I was hoping that train would roll all the way to the convention. ;) I think his ego is too large to accept VP unless he could be a puppet master type VP like Cheney. But really, I just don't see Newt and Romney getting along, at all!
Ron Paul is as nutty as ever, but he does capture the imagination of those who lack the experience or desire to think beyond their noses. You want to do away with what? Really?:doh:

god I miss Tim Russert!:D

[ApatheticNoMore]

Yea even I was thinking at least Newt is a big picture guy when we were having the discussion about energy policy. Now note this: Newt is probably too *corrupted* by right wing ideology to really have the *correct* big picture on these types of things (have to, simply have to, take into acount the environment). But at least he is capable of big picture (though do I particularly want his hand on the button? gosh no).


Ron Paul is as nutty as ever, but he does capture the imagination of those who lack the experience or desire to think beyond their noses. You want to do away with what? Really?

The wars, the NDAA, the NSA, the TSA, the whole shebang since 9-11. Heck yes!!!!! Ok do like many of Pauls positions. Think he's right on at least as many things as people project onto Obama (project on to? Yes because I never know what Obama will actually fight for!).

Look it's like this: Paul especially but even Newt to some very tiny degree (able to see the big picture) and the only ones of the 4 candidates that had anything at all to recommend them. Santorum is ridiculous, and Romney stands for nothing. He's a total empty suit. I think liberals may think Romney will be a moderate, but they are probably going to be surprised, as he actually seems to stand for nothing at all. Thus he is going to be completely manipulatable by whoever has his purse strings and whichever way Republican opinon blows (but of course more the former than the later). What is so preferable about a great big nothing, I don't know!!!! You think people would have learned about the empty suit stuff from Obama and even he might have slightly more backbone! But no, more empty suits that stand for nothing is really what we need. As things get worse and worse and the collapse into a rather repressive banana republic continues.

[peggy]

Well, Ron Paul does say some stuff that seems right. And he does have some good ideas, but unfortunately he just doesn't want to stop. He doesn't just want to trim the military, he wants to essentially eliminate it. He doesn't want the FDA or the USDA, or health care, or SS or any of it. You really can't vote for someone on one issue. He may be right on that one issue, but totally wrong on every other issue.
The thing about Paul is, there is not one single example of a successful modern nation that follows his ideology. Not one. He totally pulls this ideal out of his behind. You want to do away with government involvement in health care, SS, food and environmental safety, worker issues, infrastructure, etc...? Well, there are a few examples of nations like that in this world, but I don't think I would want to live in one!

Obama is not an empty suit. He has accomplished many things during his tenure, not the least of which was pulling our butts back from the precipice of a free fall unlike this country has seen since the great depression. You think it's bad now, if he hadn't made the moves he did, this country would be spiraling down still. the auto industry alone, which Romney said should go under (to teach them a lesson I suppose) would have gone the way of the steel industry, and we know how that one turned out. I do agree, he should have let the Bush tax cuts expire as they have been a huge part of the deficit problem we face now. I think he was trying to appease the republicans (he never did understand that they didn't want to play, didn't want to do anything for the country or the economy, or the people. They just wanted him to fail, period) and his desire to get us through this very rocky time without rocking the boat.

[Zoebird]

I think Ron Paul has a lot of good ideas, and honestly, he's been very, very consistent as a politician over the years, which is pretty darn refreshing.

[Rogar]

I was sort of hoping that the Ron Paul platform would get more media attention. As preposterous as some of his draconian cutting of government programs seems on the face, I thought of it as white boarding a lot of government programs that either don't work, won't work in the future, or agencies that over the years have grown fat and inefficient. Suddenly, people would say, hey we really did need that. And then there would be some rebuilding in ways to fit current times and budgets. Unfortunately a concept that is too radical to most and might result in some big interim problems.

While Obama has been more of a politician and less of an independently strong leader on key issues than I had hoped, Newt, Santorum, and Mitt have seemed like politicians all the way to the bank, so to speak.

[catherine]

I was sort of hoping that the Ron Paul platform would get more media attention. As preposterous as some of his draconian cutting of government programs seems on the face, I thought of it as white boarding a lot of government programs that either don't work, won't work in the future, or agencies that over the years have grown fat and inefficient. Suddenly, people would say, hey we really did need that. And then there would be some rebuilding in ways to fit current times and budgets. Unfortunately a concept that is too radical to most and might result in some big interim problems.

While Obama has been more of a politician and less of an independently strong leader on key issues than I had hoped, Newt, Santorum, and Mitt have seemed like politicians all the way to the bank, so to speak.

I so agree. I hate to be a conspiracy theorist kind of person, but I do believe mainstream media shut him out.

Jon Stewart agrees with me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMO7YG3Ul5g

[mtnlaurel]

Conan's farewell to Newt has had me in stitches all day!


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2012/04/conan-obrien-farewell-newt-gingrich.html

[Zoebird]

That is a riot. Newt makes DS cry. He says "no, angry man! no! I don't want to see angry man!" weird, right?

[mtnlaurel]

That is a riot. Newt makes DS cry. He says "no, angry man! no! I don't want to see angry man!" weird, right?

out of the mouths of babes...

[cattledog]

Conan's farewell to Newt has had me in stitches all day!


http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2012/04/conan-obrien-farewell-newt-gingrich.html

Ha, ha, ha- that's hilarious! I'm wiping the tears from my eyes!