How was the RNC this year?

LOL, Puerto Rico? You ain't welcome at the RNC!!


But really what happened was this, they had just removed the 10 Ron Paul delegates from Maine, which gave Romney the state. This has less to do with race, and more to do with the RNC changing the rules mid stream.



What a cluster fuck of a convention.

When the theme of Rommeny for the convention is "Trust me..." you know things are a mess.

Then you have almost every speaker more or less tooting their own horn for when they run for prez in 2016, while being sure to add in real quick at the end that people should vote Rommney. Ryan knows it's fucked so he is done with relying on facts. Then you have Clint Eastwood going ful senile and making Rommney's campaign staff cringe on camera at his words. The biggest star was a the Black Utah Governor. Don't know if Mia knows how here adopted religion views non-whites. Even I'm surprised by how this went down.

Surprised no one is talking about Clint Eastwood and the chair.

Clint Eastwood and the chair was classic. Unscripted and not holding back.

Well, the DNC, I'm sure, will counter with their own circus somehow. I'm glad that this is the last election cycle that my tax dollars will be spent on these things.

I'm actually shocked how well the RNC went. I had love expectations, but so many gave good speeches. Mia Love was excellent, Mrs Mittens had her moments, Condi & Rubio were unshockingly good, and Mittens/Ryan didn't blow it.

So, left hand thinks RNC was a disaster, right hand thinks it went great. Shocking results.

KingsOwn19 wrote:

So, left hand thinks RNC was a disaster, right hand thinks it went great. Shocking results.

The difference is, I have no problem calling a spade a spade. If it was terrible then I'd say it was. While Eastwood was great, he did do his fair share of rambling. It probably went over a lot of peoples heads as well.

While I loved the fact the repubs reminded everyone that America is great and that Obama has been nothing but a failure, it is what it is, a bunch of speeches. I still don't believe for a second, Mittens is what America needs. We need someone who will really cut spending like Ron Paul.

I think ryan is a miss match against biden and the dems will have to pull some shenanigans to not look foolish in that debate.

I can see where Mr. Eastwood was off putting or at least akward.

Instead of the big media moguls moderating the debate (cnn and abc) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/presidential-debate-moderators-2012_n_1772503.html

why not have unbiased media coverage??

Cu Bu wrote:

I think ryan is a miss match against biden and the dems will have to pull some shenanigans to not look foolish in that debate.

I can see where Mr. Eastwood was off putting or at least akward.

Instead of the big media moguls moderating the debate (cnn and abc) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/presidential-debate-moderators-2012_n_1772503.html

why not have unbiased media coverage??

No one can.

Biden is a dimwit, no way around that. Ryan is going to crush him in any debate. Both sides should be able to acknowledge that.

Cu Bu wrote:

I think ryan is a miss match against biden and the dems will have to pull some shenanigans to not look foolish in that debate.

I can see where Mr. Eastwood was off putting or at least akward.

Instead of the big media moguls moderating the debate (cnn and abc) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/presidential-debate-moderators-2012_n_1772503.html

why not have unbiased media coverage??

I think Ryan is blatantly dis-honest which is his most effective trait because many wanting to hear him will choose to believe him. Him being chosen as the vp candidate has more to do with that then it does the crony connection between the business his family has done with Rommney in the past. Beiden is generally to the point and seems honest to a fault, I can see people liking Ryan more for material reasons though. It sounds almost like excuses are already being made with your last part, what would you suggest is unbiased?

GDPofDRC wrote:

Cu Bu wrote:

I think ryan is a miss match against biden and the dems will have to pull some shenanigans to not look foolish in that debate.

I can see where Mr. Eastwood was off putting or at least akward.

Instead of the big media moguls moderating the debate (cnn and abc) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/presidential-debate-moderators-2012_n_1772503.html

why not have unbiased media coverage??

I think Ryan is blatantly dis-honest which is his most effective trait because many wanting to hear him will choose to believe him. Him being chosen as the vp candidate has more to do with that then it does the crony connection between the business his family has done with Rommney in the past. Beiden is generally to the point and seems honest to a fault, I can see people liking Ryan more for material reasons though. It sounds almost like excuses are already being made with your last part, what would you suggest is unbiased?

Really?

I think the RNC displayed a division among conservatives. The president Flops and makes various groups question him, he doesn't fully accept the party ticket. He says he has economic plans but that we must trust him on what they actually are. Ryan is kind of extreme but now playing slippery to pander like Rommney. I think this side has done little, strictly election-wise, to actually help get their candidate chosen.

GDPofDRC wrote:

Cu Bu wrote:

I think ryan is a miss match against biden and the dems will have to pull some shenanigans to not look foolish in that debate.

I can see where Mr. Eastwood was off putting or at least akward.

Instead of the big media moguls moderating the debate (cnn and abc) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/presidential-debate-moderators-2012_n_1772503.html

why not have unbiased media coverage??

I think Ryan is blatantly dis-honest which is his most effective trait because many wanting to hear him will choose to believe him. Him being chosen as the vp candidate has more to do with that then it does the crony connection between the business his family has done with Rommney in the past. Beiden is generally to the point and seems honest to a fault, I can see people liking Ryan more for material reasons though. It sounds almost like excuses are already being made with your last part, what would you suggest is unbiased?

In what way is Ryan being blatantly dishonest?

I like C-span the most, also wall street journal(journalism not letter to editor crap) BBC calls it down the middle aswell from what I see.

would you say CNN is unbiased??

I should throw in he is being blatantly dishonest or grossly misinformed. The validity of the statements in his speech, given to the largest audience of his political career, as been juxtaposed to the facts on said issues and there are serious lapses in truth to many of his claims. FOX News said he was dazzling, deceiving and distracting.

C-Span actually is a good example. C-Span, unlike most other outlets attempting to report and comment on the news, are not big in the opinion business.

so should the 4 moderators hail from cnn and abc?

you agree cnn is biased correct?

There should be a debate with fox and with abc. If there is a 3rd one then let let Ron Paul do it.

CNN has shows, they sell a product and it is opinion. But all of them even FOX and CNN are not lost to it, just where it matters most to them, in the ratings. CNN displays bias, but they do not approach mirroring their counterpart in that department in my opinion.

GDPofDRC wrote:

CNN has shows, they sell a product and it is opinion. But all of them even FOX and CNN are not lost to it, just where it matters most to them, in the ratings. CNN displays bias, but they do not approach mirroring their counterpart in that department in my opinion.

MSNBC is unbelievable biased. CNN doesn't take it near as far, but that doesn't change their bias.

I'll give CNN credit for atleast trying to seem like they can be in the middle. They have good and bad days..but they are definitely bent left.

MSNBC is pretty much Fox News left, if not worse in their blatant partisanship. However, they have the best non-political programming of all of them.

I also think people need to cut Clint Eastwood some slack. He's 82 years old.

Fox has the best programming regardless of politics or not.

The people agree.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2012/08/31/cable-news-ratings-for-thursday-august-30-2012/146870/

I DISAGREE!!!

GDPofDRC wrote:

I DISAGREE!!!

Shut up minority.

Quantity is are not an sound indication of quality. If you want strictly conservative programming what other choice do you have?

GDPofDRC wrote:

Quantity is are not an sound indication of quality. If you want strictly conservative programming what other choice do you have?

Talk radio & the internet mostly.

Fox also has the hottest chicks.