View Full Version : [video] Mitt Romney Fails To Sway Ron Paul Supporter At Huckabee Forum
Immortal Technique
01-14-2012, 09:24 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkJ6LrpHSNE
Airing Date Jan.14, 2012
Mitt Romney Fails To Sway Ron Paul Supporter At Huckabee Forum
Yoddle
01-14-2012, 09:31 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkJ6LrpHSNE&feature=g-u&context=G23593b5FUAAAAAAAAAA
brushfire
01-14-2012, 09:33 PM
We already have the largest military in the world - by many times.
How are we going to keep social security, medicare/medicaid, grow the military (larger than obama), and somehow cut spending? Romney is not a moron. He knows its impossible. He simply doesnt care - just like with all his flip flops... The man has ZERO integrity.
Anyone who would vote for Romney, thinking they would be getting someone better than obama, had better check their pillow for gray matter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkJ6LrpHSNE&feature=g-u&context=G23593b5FUAAAAAAAAAA
So his reply is a complete paradox: He wants to increase military spending but cut overall spending. How the heck does he propose doing that?
archangel689
01-14-2012, 09:37 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkJ6LrpHSNE
Airing Date Jan.14, 2012
Mitt Romney Fails To Sway Ron Paul Supporter Ar Huckabee Forum
BLAH, suggested romney/rand paul. if he truly thinks thats acceptable theres something wrong, he should've sent a stronger message than that.
neverseen
01-14-2012, 09:37 PM
LOVE IT!!!
ShaneEnochs
01-14-2012, 09:39 PM
We already have the largest military in the world - by many times.
That would be China. Their military is twice as large as ours.
Actually, if you include reserves, Russia's is about 10x as big as ours.
JoshS
01-14-2012, 09:40 PM
Oh wow. Slipped up at Rand as VP.
Romney was in full on speech mode, NO substance.
SlowSki
01-14-2012, 09:42 PM
I don't think Romney was really trying to appeal to a Ron Paul supporter with that answer... LOL
satchelmcqueen
01-14-2012, 09:45 PM
ha!!!
PauliticsPolitics
01-14-2012, 09:46 PM
We already have the largest military in the world - by many times.
We have the most expensive military in the world - by many times, not the largest by personnel.
justinjj
01-14-2012, 09:48 PM
BLAH, suggested romney/rand paul. if he truly thinks thats acceptable theres something wrong, he should've sent a stronger message than that.
I hate this notion that Rand Paul and Ron Paul are synonymous - THEY'RE NOT. If Romney wants to see how fast people can jump off the Paul bandwagon, then he can just go ahead and name Rand as VP - I would be voting Libertarian if that was the case. I would bet every penny I own that a Romney/Rand ticket would lose to Obama and even if they won - WHO FUCKING CARES, NOTHING WOULD BE DIFFERENT. CAPS LOCK BECAUSE I'M DRUNK.
Lol at trying to sway a RP supporter by stating we should increase military spending. Guy was obviously pandering toward the SC military crowd, he could care less about Ron Paul. After he wins the primary then he'll pander to us.
brushfire
01-14-2012, 09:53 PM
Actually, if you include reserves, Russia's is about 10x as big as ours.
Shane, can you please share your source(s)?
http://www.globalfirepower.com/
http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp
spending:
http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/defspend1.jpg
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/04/05/how-does-u-s-defense-spending-compare-with-other-countries/
smithtg
01-14-2012, 09:54 PM
We have the most expensive military in the world - by many times, not the largest by personnel.
i wish the guy who asked the question would have said this and asked Mitt "Mitt, how do you plan on paying for the huge military industrial complex?"
brushfire
01-14-2012, 09:56 PM
We have the most expensive military in the world - by many times, not the largest by personnel.
Yes, you are correct - I failed to differentiate that.
Not to argue the technicality, but to make the intended point: We have the largest military as personnel are concerned, but we also have weapons/technology that can be considered force multipliers.
smithtg
01-14-2012, 09:57 PM
Lol at trying to sway a RP supporter by stating we should increase military spending. Guy was obviously pandering toward the SC military crowd, he could care less about Ron Paul. After he wins the primary then he'll pander to us.
how dumb are people really? do they really truly believe the amount of military spending is not that much? Its all published. I think what scares me is the "off the books" military spending. Also dont forget the billions to maintain the nuclear industrial complex that just happen to be under the department of energy
Kregisen
01-14-2012, 09:59 PM
Shane, can you please share your source(s)?
http://www.globalfirepower.com/
http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp
spending:
http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/defspend1.jpg
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/04/05/how-does-u-s-defense-spending-compare-with-other-countries/
Our foreign policy is actually about $1 trillion a year. There are departments besides department of defense that goes towards military, such as department of energy.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jul/15/ron-paul/ron-paul-says-us-spends-1-trillion-foreign-policy/
Kregisen
01-14-2012, 10:00 PM
This guy did a great job, but yes I wouldn't have mentioned the Rand Paul as VP thing. I would also have sent a stronger message but hey, great job speaking on national tv with confidence.
that was actually pretty awesome. early reports were he might be a plant, but... i don't know... if so, it backfired. the crowded cheer when he said he supports RP even more now is telling. wish he didn't mention that goofy romney/rand ticket tho.
Publicani
01-14-2012, 10:04 PM
So his reply is a complete paradox: He wants to increase military spending but cut overall spending. How the heck does he propose doing that?
Didn't you hear what he said? He worked in private sector, that's how!
brushfire
01-14-2012, 10:06 PM
Our foreign policy is actually about $1 trillion a year. There are departments besides department of defense that goes towards military, such as department of energy.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jul/15/ron-paul/ron-paul-says-us-spends-1-trillion-foreign-policy/
I agree 100%
Publicani
01-14-2012, 10:07 PM
This guy did a great job, but yes I wouldn't have mentioned the Rand Paul as VP thing.
agreed
Student Of Paulism
01-14-2012, 10:07 PM
Didn't you hear what he said? He worked in private sector, that's how!
Im so tired of hearing that shit from Romney, that is all he ever says :rolleyes: and he says it so 'out of breath-like'...I WORKED IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR....I KNOW HOW THE ECONOMY WORKS...I KNOW HOW TO CREATE JOBS! This guy is the ultimate car salesman when it comes down to it.
georgiaboy
01-14-2012, 10:09 PM
heh, as if ...
Occam's Banana
01-14-2012, 10:16 PM
Romney @ 0:45 mark:
"[Obama's] view is that we should continue to cut the military and he's gonna cut the spending by about a trillion dollars ..."
Is Romney really trying to woo a Ron Paul supporter by bitching about Obama (:confused:) wanting to cut a trillion in spending???
Am I missing something here? :confused:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkJ6LrpHSNE
Airing Date Jan.14, 2012
Mitt Romney Fails To Sway Ron Paul Supporter At Huckabee Forum
ShaneEnochs
01-14-2012, 10:20 PM
Shane, can you please share your source(s)?
http://www.globalfirepower.com/
http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp
spending:
http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/defspend1.jpg
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/04/05/how-does-u-s-defense-spending-compare-with-other-countries/
Sure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_troops
Matthew Zak
01-14-2012, 10:31 PM
I like talking about Rand Paul as Romney's VP. Not because I want him to be Romney's VP or that I think he would in a million years -- but continuing to put him in the discussion is healthy for Rand's political aspirations in the future. He has options. And I believe he will be more Ron Paul than Mitt Romney as he runs for the highest office in the future.
Carole
01-15-2012, 06:13 AM
In Romney's talking points answer, he was not-so-subltley trying to equate Dr. Paul's foreign policy with BO's. He was trying to plant the idea that Dr. Paul's wish to cut military spending was detrimental to the US.
He never answered the question at all.
bunklocoempire
01-15-2012, 06:22 AM
In Romney's talking points answer, he was not-so-subltley trying to equate Dr. Paul's foreign policy with BO's. He was trying to plant the idea that Dr. Paul's wish to cut military spending was detrimental to the US.
He never answered the question at all.
Then again, by not answering how he's going to bother to woo Paul supporters, he's essentially suggesting an Obama win suits him fine.
But I hear ya.;)
Fort Lauderdale
01-15-2012, 07:40 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=yk8e01jOXv4
TheDriver
01-15-2012, 07:46 AM
We already have the largest military in the world - by many times.
How are we going to keep social security, medicare/medicaid, grow the military (larger than obama), and somehow cut spending? Romney is not a moron. He knows its impossible. He simply doesnt care - just like with all his flip flops... The man has ZERO integrity.
Anyone who would vote for Romney, thinking they would be getting someone better than obama, had better check their pillow for gray matter.
+1
Romney knows it's impossible without trillion dollar deficits, and so does the media. One has to wonder why the media doesn't point this obvious problem out.
Shelton88
01-15-2012, 07:50 AM
Romney is a complete tool. This dude bounced around talking points like he was playing ping pong.
Ronulus
01-15-2012, 08:46 AM
The newt gingrich federal reserve question is awesome. More awesome because it shows that Ron Paul supporters aren't just hippies and college kids.
PastaRocket848
01-15-2012, 08:54 AM
Why doesn't anyone point out that when neocons say "we need to have the strongest military in the world", that implies that they think what we have now is NOT the most powerful military in the world? They're calling our military weak! Unpatriotic! Lol.
Trigonx
01-15-2012, 08:59 AM
I could just see some people there saying, "They keep talking about this guy Ron Paul, he must be important if they keep name dropping him"
Brett85
01-15-2012, 09:30 AM
BLAH, suggested romney/rand paul. if he truly thinks thats acceptable theres something wrong, he should've sent a stronger message than that.
Not all Ron Paul supporters think exactly alike.
Occam's Banana
01-15-2012, 05:35 PM
The newt gingrich federal reserve question is awesome. More awesome because it shows that Ron Paul supporters aren't just hippies and college kids.
Apparently, neither the question-asker nor "American history & founding-father expert" Newt Gingrich are aware that there were "founders" who WERE strong adovocates of central banking.
I'm sure Gingrich must be aware of Alexander Hamilton - but being the shameless panderer he is, he chose not to point out the fact that Hamilton is pretty much the "Founding Father of American Central Banking."
The questioner nailed it on hist post-question analysis, though. Newt's answer makes it pretty clear that when it comes to the Federal Reserve system, Gingrich would do nothing but rearrange deck chairs.
He would make the FED more transparent, he would limit it's powers, he would fire Bernanke, blah blah blah.
(BTW, the biggest applause line was the shot at Bernanke - WTF? Bernanke is just the front-man - the FED is the problem, not the particular bankster in charge of it).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=yk8e01jOXv4
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.