Yup, there's that too! But I maintain that these "issues" seem to be taken up by "subgroups" within the Democratic party. And yes, this interferes with them working as a team. (Or maybe that's what you said - if so, we're in complete agreement.)

In any case, their lack of success was a big disappointment to me.

It still seems to be the lost art of compromise that has led to this sorry state of affairs - at least in my (rapidly going senile) mind.

- Jack

 

CNS quoted a Gallup pole. Are you saying Gallup is illegitmate?

All the major media outlets use Gallup. You guys are funny.

 

So now Gallup is fraudulent?

Dewser, you're not a very good "pot stirrer". You should take some lessons from serotta. He's taught me more than you ever will.

 

Frank,

I can assure you that if I want to stir the pot, the damn thing will get stirred. At least, until a mod jumps in.

That's not my intention at all, sir. I just want folks to think outside the party lines when the parties don't make sense. No harm in that, is there?

And nobody said Gallup was 'fraudulent'.

 

We're mostly on the same line except that I disagree with many of these subgroups so their self promoted failure is a win for me.

That might be the thing I like the most about Romney. He was the Governor of Massachusetts. We all know that place is about as liberal and (D) controlled as it gets. Yet he got things done. To me this shows he can work with people and come to an agreement. On the opposite end of the spectrum is obama, he has shown many times it's his way or no way. He does not know how to compromise and will not attempt to learn. So much so that he barely works out agreements in his own party. As long as he lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. gridlock and dirty partisan politics will be the name of the game.

 

Joe, you may be right about this. The only way we'll know for sure is if Governor Romney wins in November. I agree, he seemed to work magic in Massachusetts. And, toward the end of the Republican primary season, he was the only candidate I wanted to win the nomination. But, since then, he's seemed to tack to the far right, and that worries me.

In my opinion, he appears to "drift" all over the place. Following the prevailing winds. I yearn for someone who is a bit more "anchored".

- Jack

 

Eh?

 

I can see how you might... have that opinion, when the contrast is Obama.

 

Just proves my point, doesn't it? There's always someone marching to the "different drummer".

- Jack

 

Good observations. I don't understand why Romney is drifting right though, what other option do the Republicans have at this point? They may want rid of Obama more than they want Mitt, so no worry for him there. If he feels the need to drift, why not work toward the middle which he really needs to win. I'm not sure his flip flop from Pro Choice to Pro Life will help him with the middle.

 

That's the trouble. It's hard to tell where his mind really is. I suspect though, it might be an attempt to "energize the base", and get them more interested in persuading people to vote and, to vote their way, rather than sitting home on election day.

All in all, he suddenly appears to be no more than just another politician, at least in my admittedly limited view. Does that make President Obama better? The far left would say no. They feel he has sold them out.

- Jack

 

Romney is not flip-flopping - he's compromising. In order to win (i.e. defeat the Democratic propaganda machine) he has to have the support of the far right and the middle.

 

Going to be interesting to see how it all works out.

- Jack

 

Merika!
If you dont liek it you can leaf!

 

Are these one of your tweets?: