Rick Perry on Letterman

After I posted my comment you re-edited your statment to correct your mistake. That is a good thing, no Obama did not use a teleprompter in the debates (to my knowledge). But as president he relies on a teleprompter in almost all public speaking occasions...and flubs when the teleprompter isn't working.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omHUsRTYFAU

Romney will do very well in debating Obama and his failed agenda of "Change We Can Believe In".

But as president he relies on a teleprompter in almost all public speaking occasions. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Reagan do the same?

President Romney probably won't need one.

President Romney probably won't need one. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

I suspect Romney's best chance to win the Presidency in 2012 would be by launching an Independent bid, cuz he will have diffculty getting enough support to win the Republican nomination!

Hell, there are not that many Republicans that even smart enough to hold their nose while they vote!

Are you as dumb as your statment?

Most all analysts think Romney will get the nomination......

Not only the poltical analysts, but the bet takers as well: Romney is the heads on favorite of sport bookers to win the nomination (current odds at 5:12).


This is a test of your IQ: Who do you think will be the nominee?

I suspect Romney's best chance to win the Presidency in 2012 would be by launching an Independent bid, cuz he will have diffculty getting enough support to win the Republican nomination!

Hell, there are not that many Republicans that even smart enough to hold their nose while they vote! Originally Posted by bigtex

This is a test of your IQ: Who do you think will be the nominee? Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Obama will win the nomination of the Democratic Party!

Its a good thing that the position of Texas Governor is a weak postion.

Are you as dumb as your statment?

Most all analysts think Romney will get the nomination...... Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Since you brought the issue up, shall we discuss recent historical trends in Presidential politics?

In the months leading up to the Iowa caucuses in 2008, Hillary had a commanding lead only to lose Iowa and eventually the nomination to an upstart named Barack Obama.

On the Republican side, McCain's poll numbers had slipped to the single digits in 2007. Do I need to point out to you that both Obama and McCain were the nominees?

In 2003 Howard Dean was the acknowledged frontrunner in the weeks and months leading up to Iowa. John Kerry won Iowa and the nomination.

Whirly, you have repeatedly proclaimed Obama as the loser in the 2012 elections. Shall we go back for the past 30 years in Presidential elections. When Reagan ran for re-election his poll numbers were down significantly but he recovered in time to win a fairly significant victory over Mondale.

George H.W. Bush was down to Dukakis as late as the summer of 1998 and recovered in time to cruise to victory in November. While on the subject of Bush the elder (or smarter, take your pick), he had sky high approval ratings in the Fall of 1991 only to lose to Clinton in November of 1992.

Speaking of Clinton, he was considered down and out in the Fall of 1995, only to recover in time to win a significant victory against Bob Dole in November 1996.

And then there was the most unpopular (and incompetent) President in modern history, otherwise known as The Shrub (or Bush the Dumber, take your pick)! After sky high approvals in the aftermath of 9/11 he appeared to be very vulnerable by the primary season of 2004. Instead he won a close victory over John Kerry.

Is there a common denominator to all of this Presidential politics historical data? You betcha (with my best Sarah Palin wink)! The candidate that is the flavor of the day today might be the one to have an "Oops" moment next month. (Just ask Rick Perry)

A month is almost a lifetime in politics. A year is a lifetime x 12. The fact that Romney is up in the polls today does not mean he will emerge from the Republican pack as the victor in the spring of 2012.

And finally, despite your repeated claims that Obama is the sure loser in November of 2012 doesn't mean that Obama won't end up winning 4 more years and quite possibly by a significant margin. Who knows? Obama might have his own "Oops" moment to contend with by next Fall. In any event, Obama will be very difficult for any of the remaining 7 Drawfs to beat a year from now. I believe Snow White Romney represents the Republican's best chance (by far) to win next November but I stand by my previous claim that he will have a difficult time winning the Republican nomination.

To try to speculate who will emerge from the Republican pack during the spring of 2012 is not much different than herding cats! To take it a step further to try to predict with any degree of accuracy who will emerge as the victor on the first Tuesday of November in 2012 is not much different than herding both cats and dogs at the same time.

This is a test of your IQ: Who do you think will be the nominee? Originally Posted by Whirlaway

I stated that Obama will win the nomination of the Democratic Party!

Whirly, now you see why I only predicted Obama will be the Democratic nominee in 2012. Everything else is still anybody's guess!

Did I pass the IQ test?

It appears as though Whirly chose not to respond.

Truth hurts, doesn't it Whirly?

It appears as though Whirly chose not to respond.

Truth hurts, doesn't it Whirly? Originally Posted by bigtex

maybe he has a real job, unlike most of you donkeys

maybe he has a real job, unlike most of you donkeys Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

I wouldn't call being Marshy's personal fluffer a real job, but if that is the kind of "real job" that makes you elephants aroused, go for it!

Who am I to object?