Man Pawlenty is dying, even with this pro-Repub/anti-Obama crowd.

Dry, non-charismatic speakers like this just create no appeal for the party.

OK, there's a good line:
"A lot of people fail at their first job"

A good one from last night:
"Obama has never even run a lemonade stand"

Funny, much of the media is saying the opposite. I liked Christie, didn't get to see it and so have only seen snippets, but I'm not sure why everyone is railing on him.

I also thought Ann seemed a bit stiff and "corporate", but she'd not a professional speaker.

I was holding my breath a few times that Huckabee was going to go too far off the farm, but he ended up being pretty good.

Christie has had by far the best speech, with Mia Love 2nd


I could see myself voting for Christie in 2016

I truly think Romney messed up not picking Christie

Haven't watched a second, and haven't really read anything on it.
Conventions are such a waste of time. Such an outdated concept, for both R and D.

I could not care less about these things.

I would rather have a few more actual, long form debates than these things. They serve nothing but political boilerplate, bs and lack of substance language.
I highly, highly doubt a voter will change their view based on the conventions.

Susana Martinez is a republican quadruple threat! Woman, hispanic, grew up poor and carries a .357!

I'm still waiting for one of these speakers to tell us of why we should vote for Romney. All I've heard so far are lame jokes and criticism of BHO. Some of this stuff seems more suited to "Fox and Friends" than the RNC but, who knows, maybe Roger is writing the speeches.

Sean Hannity is probably sporting wood all week. Next week the Viagra wears off for him.

stlouiedipalma;1257403 wrote:I'm still waiting for one of these speakers to tell us of why we should vote for Romney. All I've heard so far are lame jokes and criticism of BHO. Some of this stuff seems more suited to "Fox and Friends" than the RNC but, who knows, maybe Roger is writing the speeches.

Sean Hannity is probably sporting wood all week. Next week the Viagra wears off for him.

If you don't already know why you should vote for Romney, no speech, event, or education ever will convince you to do so. Sometimes the uninformed want to maintain their stance.

wow...just wow. Great speeches by Rice and Ryan. Dr. Rice is truly an inspirational figure. She has walked the walk...and when she talks the talk, it is the undisputed truth. After listening to Paul Ryan, BHO has got to be wondering how he can shed Biden from the ticket.

HitsRus;1257449 wrote:wow...just wow. Great speeches by Rice and Ryan. Dr. Rice is truly an inspirational figure. She has walked the walk...and when she talks the talk, it is the undisputed truth. After listening to Paul Ryan, BHO has got to be wondering how he can shed Biden from the ticket.

Ryan hit a home run, I unfortunately caught about two minutes of it live but I'll see the whole speech at my DVR this evening and I read the transcript just a few minutes ago.

Economy. Economy. Economy. Young people. Young people. Young people. Under our current incompetent administration they have little hope for the future - a career, raising a family without government food stamps, the possibility of retirement (wait, even my generation won't enjoy that because we'll be paying for our parents' largesse), 4 more years of this and they'll have an even bleaker future. If Romney/Ryan wins this for us they need to get the youth vote - they aren't as experienced as you and I that realize that obama is an empty suit, so they need to be convinced. In that regard Ryan performed excellently.

Ryan was great. He's the most "presidential" candidate we've had, in all respects (save maybe the gray hair), in a long time. I was trying to remember a VP that overshadowed and was more likeable than the President and couldn't come up with one in recent memory. Some would argue that's a risk for Romney, while others would say he had little choice of picking someone weaker or less known.

I don't think Ryan is going to do as much of the usual VP bullshit. I think with regard to the economy he's going to be very much a co-leader with Romney, at a minimum. Contrast that, given the task ahead, vs. the incapable Biden and disinterested Obama.

Unsurprisingly, perhaps, a lot of the country didn't really know Ryan outside of some slanted media potshots. And what struck me the most about his speech, was he's almost as charismatic as Obama was in 2008, but the teleprompter isn't the brains behind the suit.

[video=youtube;B39W91O-rUg][/video]

Yawwwwwwwwnnnnnnn.zzzzzzzzz

^^^^yeah....like you actually watched.

gut;1257475 wrote:Ryan was great. He's the most "presidential" candidate we've had, in all respects (save maybe the gray hair), in a long time. I was trying to remember a VP that overshadowed and was more likeable than the President and couldn't come up with one in recent memory. Some would argue that's a risk for Romney, while others would say he had little choice of picking someone weaker or less known.

I don't think Ryan is going to do as much of the usual VP bullshit. I think with regard to the economy he's going to be very much a co-leader with Romney, at a minimum. Contrast that, given the task ahead, vs. the incapable Biden and disinterested Obama.

Give me a break! He's just as inexperienced as Obama was! He has ZERO executive experience (which every Republican screamed about with regard to President Obama) and has barely had a job in the real world short of waiting tables. Romney is way more "presidential." Romney's just not that charismatic.

And, there's also the fact that he writes fairy tale budgets that will explode the deficit while doing little to increase demand while also claiming to be a fiscal disciplinarian.

But, I suppose we can all see how people like President Obama and Warren Harding got elected with the fawning over Paul Ryan. :rolleyes:

BoatShoes;1257628 wrote:Give me a break! He's just as inexperienced as Obama was! He has ZERO executive experience (which every Republican screamed about with regard to President Obama) and has barely had a job in the real world short of waiting tables. Romney is way more "presidential." Romney's just not that charismatic.

And, there's also the fact that he writes fairy tale budgets that will explode the deficit while doing little to increase demand while also claiming to be a fiscal disciplinarian.

But, I suppose we can all see how people like President Obama and Warren Harding got elected with the fawning over Paul Ryan. :rolleyes:

Note, using the quote feature to satisfy 2kool4skool.

So are you admitting that Obama is inexperienced? Last time I checked Ryan is running for Veep, not the Presidency, and waiting tables is a helluva lot better than (note I know the difference between "then" and "than") chooming it up in Hawaii. And how is that current budget going for us - a fairy tale or a nightmare?

The answer is clear, if we re-elect Obama we deserve what we get.

The media is starting to go wild with this "Ryan is a liar" think after last night. He was great last night, but even Fox News of all places is latching on to this anecdote he was telling about Obama closing the GM plant as a blatant lie, and if that was the only thing in the speech. Just stop using that story already as it draws attention away from the core message about Obama and the regime.

[video=youtube;dAwKrKbjxhU][/video]

I am very interested to see how Willard does tonight.

Ryan hit a home run last night, and if you asked most of the people in the hall they quite frankly probably wish he was at the top of the ticket instead of Willard.

What does he do tonight to top Ryan, or will he end up looking flat in comparisson which would be a problem.

BoatShoes;1257628 wrote:Give me a break! He's just as inexperienced as Obama was! He has ZERO executive experience (which every Republican screamed about with regard to President Obama) and has barely had a job in the real world short of waiting tables. Romney is way more "presidential." Romney's just not that charismatic.

And, there's also the fact that he writes fairy tale budgets that will explode the deficit while doing little to increase demand while also claiming to be a fiscal disciplinarian.

But, I suppose we can all see how people like President Obama and Warren Harding got elected with the fawning over Paul Ryan. :rolleyes:

You're really going to compare Ryan's experience to Obama? I guess when you're desperate you're left with diminishing accomplishments of others to prop-up Obama.

And I'd offer there's a HUGE difference between the two - Ryan actually knows what he's talking about while Obama fooled many, many voters with his magic teleprompter.

LMAO at your calling Ryan's budget a "fairy tale" that will "explode the deficit" when you solution is MORE govt spending, ignoring the keynesian economics is failing all over the globe. It's not surprising to me that "more is less" is a concept completely foreign to you. The govt can't grow the economy when the multiplier is so clearly less than 1 (perhaps even negative), which recent empirical evidence pretty clearly illustrates.

IggyPride00;1257676 wrote:I am very interested to see how Willard does tonight.

Ryan hit a home run last night, and if you asked most of the people in the hall they quite frankly probably wish he was at the top of the ticket instead of Willard.

What does he do tonight to top Ryan, or will he end up looking flat in comparisson which would be a problem.

The one knock, and it's a pretty big one, that I see for Ryan is he still looks too young. Plenty of time for him to run down the road, even a decade or more later. He'll either be teed up in 2020 or he'll be able to wait, a luxury other potential VP choices might not have had.

I don't think Romney has to top Ryan. My feeling is Ryan is going to be the attack dog, and Romney is going to try to stay above all that. As opposed to being "flat", Romney will try to come across as more Presidential, more unifying, and emphasize his ability to compromise and reach across the aisle.

And I'd offer there's a HUGE difference between the two - Ryan actually knows what he's talking about

I would like to believe that, but he was a huge champion of big government expansion when the party was in power. With no private sector experience and a voting record littered with big government handouts and giveaways I worry that he is like BHO in pulling the wool over the eyes of those that want to believe so badly that there is someone out there committed to smaller government.

BHO taught us how important it is to look past the rhetoric, and in Ryan's case we won't know how committed he is to smaller government until he actually is in power.

It is easy to be for it when you don't have the power to make it happen (as has been the case the past few years). When you have the power though (as we saw from 2000-06) the temptation to expand government proved to be too intoxicating to pass up for him and many like him in Congress.

That will be the true test of his new conversion to fiscal conservatism and whether it was more than just lip service to get elected.

so I hear Ryan was pretty "liberal" with the truth last night (see what I did there???)

gosh a ruddies
abe lincoln was inexperience with only one term in the house of representatives and no executive experience is usually considered to by most historians as our best president, james buchanan had tons had been a representative, senator, ambassador, secretary of state who is considered by many to be one of our worst.
herbert hoover was a self made multi millionaire, harry truman was a business failure.

He's no Jack Ryan that's for sure.