Romney’s out with his first ad of the general election. What’s your take?

Governor Christie and Mayor Booker team up in a web video that has tongues wagging.

Obama’s deputy campaign manager, Stephanie Cutter, has a new video calling out Karl Rove and Crossroads for spending “$25 million from secret donors to tear down the president.” (“Secret donors,” sounds scary.)

What else is on your political brain this weekend?

Comments

  • Arthur

    “In an October 2011 Associated Press poll, 21 percent of respondents said they would be less likely to cast a presidential vote for a Mormon. Four percent said they would be less likely to vote for a Black person.” ~finalcall.com

    Despite the recent campaign to get people to tolerate Mormons, do you think that 21% are still less likely to cast a vote for a Mormon?

    • Anonymous

      I never realized Mormans were such pariah they had to be “tolerated”. I kinda enjoyed Donny and Marie when I saw them in Vegas. For what recent campaign to tolerate Mormons do you speak? I have seen or heard nothing ( ads, tv, speech, etc.) that suggests there is a an active campaign on getting people to accept it.

      I do believe, however, that his faith has been an issue for some and I do believe part of his problems in the primary was a result of his faith. I also believe Obama’s recent evolution toward gay marriage will do more to galvanize the people who might have been more likely to not vote for Romney because of his faith to actually cast their vote for Romney because of Obama’s position on that issue.

    • Anonymous

      I have said it many times, I could give a rip less about Romney’s religion.  

      Does he have the skill set to do what needs to be done?

      Probably

      What does he truly believe in?

      Is it what he told us in this election cycle or the last?  Who knows.

      I don’t like Romney as a candidate, but if I did, religion would have a zero negative effect on my vote.

  • Arthur

    “In an October 2011 Associated Press poll, 21 percent of respondents said they would be less likely to cast a presidential vote for a Mormon. Four percent said they would be less likely to vote for a Black person.” ~finalcall.com

    Despite the recent campaign to get people to tolerate Mormons, do you think that 21% are still less likely to cast a vote for a Mormon?

    • Anonymous

      I never realized Mormans were such pariah they had to be “tolerated”. I kinda enjoyed Donny and Marie when I saw them in Vegas. For what recent campaign to tolerate Mormons do you speak? I have seen or heard nothing ( ads, tv, speech, etc.) that suggests there is a an active campaign on getting people to accept it.

      I do believe, however, that his faith has been an issue for some and I do believe part of his problems in the primary was a result of his faith. I also believe Obama’s recent evolution toward gay marriage will do more to galvanize the people who might have been more likely to not vote for Romney because of his faith to actually cast their vote for Romney because of Obama’s position on that issue.

    • Anonymous

      I have said it many times, I could give a rip less about Romney’s religion.  

      Does he have the skill set to do what needs to be done?

      Probably

      What does he truly believe in?

      Is it what he told us in this election cycle or the last?  Who knows.

      I don’t like Romney as a candidate, but if I did, religion would have a zero negative effect on my vote.

  • Arthur

    Per The 300, Leonidas’ “Victory” was to show how free men could make a supposed God-King bleed. In 2008, Ron Paul’s “Victory” was to show that free men could penetrate a supposed impenetrable political system.

    Inspired by Leonidas, thousands of free Greeks rose to overthrow the corrupt Persians. Likewise, free men are rising to overthrow the corrupt US political system. Frankly, it will become a global phenomenon.

    Consider the GA GOP Convention. The floor was about 40% Ron Paul folks, including little ol’ me. It’s easy to write this off as a loss for Paul, but 40% is a HUGE gain from that in 2008…right in the heart of Gingrich neocon land (LOL…Gingrich got booed so hard for mentioning Romney, no other speakers mention Mitt’s name). In fact, the neocon’s in charge had to resort to stacking the deck with handpicked delegates instead of actually interviewing potential delegates. And they flat out refused to let potential delegates present themselves from the floor. Still, a fairly civil event.

    Paul is also substantially growing in all states. His delegate win in Minnesota over this weekend adds to his many delegate wins.

    Deny it all you want…the Revolution is happening.

  • Arthur

    Per The 300, Leonidas’ “Victory” was to show how free men could make a supposed God-King bleed. In 2008, Ron Paul’s “Victory” was to show that free men could penetrate a supposed impenetrable political system.

    Inspired by Leonidas, thousands of free Greeks rose to overthrow the corrupt Persians. Likewise, free men are rising to overthrow the corrupt US political system. Frankly, it will become a global phenomenon.

    Consider the GA GOP Convention. The floor was about 40% Ron Paul folks, including little ol’ me. It’s easy to write this off as a loss for Paul, but 40% is a HUGE gain from that in 2008…right in the heart of Gingrich neocon land (LOL…Gingrich got booed so hard for mentioning Romney, no other speakers mention Mitt’s name). In fact, the neocon’s in charge had to resort to stacking the deck with handpicked delegates instead of actually interviewing potential delegates. And they flat out refused to let potential delegates present themselves from the floor. Still, a fairly civil event.

    Paul is also substantially growing in all states. His delegate win in Minnesota over this weekend adds to his many delegate wins.

    Deny it all you want…the Revolution is happening.

  • Anonymous

    Steve Bowman, a client of Acton & Dystel, writes at Breitbart.com that non-fiction writers were told to write their own bio and to write it in the third person.

    This means Obama wrote his own bio stating he was born in Kenya.

    Not only did he do it in 1991 but also in June of 1998:
    http://web.archive.org/web/19980627122741/http://www.dystel.com/client.html 

    He also did it in February 2005:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20030208083442/http://www.dystel.com/client.html 

    And yet again in April of 2007 when he was the junior Senator from Illinois:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20070403190001/http://www.dystel.com/clientlist.html#o 

    Each time the text was updated.  At no time was “born in Kenya” removed.

    I guess this really does make Breitbart a Birther according to Brian.

    • Anonymous

      I will not pretend to know what every person who works for the breitbart.com website believes in regards to Obama’s birth.

      • Anonymous

        But you refuse to even comment when a reputable source shows four times when Obama, in his own words, states he was born in Kenya.

        He only stopped doing so less then a year before he ran for President.

        • Anonymous

          There are many things people can accuse me of. Refusing to comment is not one of them.

          You would like me to engage with you regarding the substance of this issue, I will not. How about you and Gary comment to each other on your heartfelt deep concerns over Obama’s birth and the rest of us will simply read them, and laugh. I have more interest into the mindset and seriousness of “birthers” (a term I did not invent) more than I do the substance of their conspiracy. But, like usual, my replies to birthers only serves to give them more excuses to talk about it and post more comments about it. My mistake.

          • Anonymous

            Then Breitbart are Birthers to you after all.

          • Gururussell

            If you can take some time away from your busy schedule of laughing, read Mark Styeyn’s latest:

            http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/obama-354827-ever-white.html

            THAT’S why it matters. 

            Obviously, no one will be able to 100% prove where America’s worst president ever was born.  And, regardless, it is not going to get him out of office for this term.

            But, at the risk of being uber-repetitive, I’ll say again:
            If this issue is true, and can be PROVEN (key word), we’d be “loons” not to use it on him.

            Read the article.  Try not to hit your knees on the bottom of your desk every time the word “Kenya” is used.

            • Anonymous

              Maybe that is what this all boils down to after all.  Obama lied to get placement and money to attend college which is why all of his records are locked away.

              Either scenario does not bode well for The Obamanation.

              One puts a big dent in his ability to be re-elected and the other says he doesn’t qualify for the post.

              Which one would be more harmful?

              • Gururussell

                Lying on your resume gets you fired in the business world.  This is the same situation.

    • Steve Feinstein

      The issue is not whether or not it was true that he was born in Kenya. Or even if it’s provable.

      That’s not the issue for this campaign, and it never has been.

      The issue is whether or not the liberal mainstream media–where the mushy 10% middle of undecided swing voters get most of the news they use to form their 11th-hour voting opinions– will cover this at all, and give it credence.

      They will not.

      To not understand that is to fundamentally miss the essence of how closely-contested campaigns are won and lost. The 2012 has no Watergate, no Iranian hostage situation, no Vietnam. Nothing to assure the defeat of an incumbent.

      If the liberal MSM doesn’t lead the way with negative, hounding, day-after-day pressure on this issue, then undecided voters never get the message and lawmakers are not pressured by a swelling public outcry into taking action.

      Makes no difference what any pundit or sheriff says.

      • Anonymous

        If we are ever waiting on the MSM to hold Democrats to the same standards they do Republicans then we would never win elections. Republicans win in spite of the media, not because of it. Never have. Never will.

        The question is not whether Obama’s biography is a legitimate issue. The question is, for Team Romney, is it an effective issue. Two different standards. I submit that if Romeny allowed his campaign to get in the weeds on such an issue it would not be effective and would only serve to allow Obama to avoid his record and failures over the last three years. Team Romney should run from it like they are running for their lives. Four years ago Obama was an unknown, a blank slate. Biography mattered. Today Obama is the incumbent President of the United States, with a very poor record of accomplishment and economic success. Obama’s biography is irrelevant at this point. The liberal MSM would love for Republicans to take their eye off the flat slow fastball that is Obamanomics.

  • Anonymous

    Steve Bowman, a client of Acton & Dystel, writes at Breitbart.com that non-fiction writers were told to write their own bio and to write it in the third person.

    This means Obama wrote his own bio stating he was born in Kenya.

    Not only did he do it in 1991 but also in June of 1998:
    http://web.archive.org/web/19980627122741/http://www.dystel.com/client.html 

    He also did it in February 2005:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20030208083442/http://www.dystel.com/client.html 

    And yet again in April of 2007 when he was the junior Senator from Illinois:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20070403190001/http://www.dystel.com/clientlist.html#o 

    Each time the text was updated.  At no time was “born in Kenya” removed.

    I guess this really does make Breitbart a Birther according to Brian.

    • Anonymous

      I will not pretend to know what every person who works for the breitbart.com website believes in regards to Obama’s birth.

      • Anonymous

        But you refuse to even comment when a reputable source shows four times when Obama, in his own words, states he was born in Kenya.

        He only stopped doing so less then a year before he ran for President.

        • Anonymous

          There are many things people can accuse me of. Refusing to comment is not one of them.

          You would like me to engage with you regarding the substance of this issue, I will not. How about you and Gary comment to each other on your heartfelt deep concerns over Obama’s birth and the rest of us will simply read them, and laugh. I have more interest into the mindset and seriousness of “birthers” (a term I did not invent) more than I do the substance of their conspiracy. But, like usual, my replies to birthers only serves to give them more excuses to talk about it and post more comments about it. My mistake.

          • Anonymous

            Then Breitbart are Birthers to you after all.

          • Gururussell

            If you can take some time away from your busy schedule of laughing, read Mark Styeyn’s latest:

            http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/obama-354827-ever-white.html

            THAT’S why it matters. 

            Obviously, no one will be able to 100% prove where America’s worst president ever was born.  And, regardless, it is not going to get him out of office for this term.

            But, at the risk of being uber-repetitive, I’ll say again:
            If this issue is true, and can be PROVEN (key word), we’d be “loons” not to use it on him.

            Read the article.  Try not to hit your knees on the bottom of your desk every time the word “Kenya” is used.

            • Anonymous

              Maybe that is what this all boils down to after all.  Obama lied to get placement and money to attend college which is why all of his records are locked away.

              Either scenario does not bode well for The Obamanation.

              One puts a big dent in his ability to be re-elected and the other says he doesn’t qualify for the post.

              Which one would be more harmful?

              • Gururussell

                Lying on your resume gets you fired in the business world.  This is the same situation.

    • Steve Feinstein

      The issue is not whether or not it was true that he was born in Kenya. Or even if it’s provable.

      That’s not the issue for this campaign, and it never has been.

      The issue is whether or not the liberal mainstream media–where the mushy 10% middle of undecided swing voters get most of the news they use to form their 11th-hour voting opinions– will cover this at all, and give it credence.

      They will not.

      To not understand that is to fundamentally miss the essence of how closely-contested campaigns are won and lost. The 2012 has no Watergate, no Iranian hostage situation, no Vietnam. Nothing to assure the defeat of an incumbent.

      If the liberal MSM doesn’t lead the way with negative, hounding, day-after-day pressure on this issue, then undecided voters never get the message and lawmakers are not pressured by a swelling public outcry into taking action.

      Makes no difference what any pundit or sheriff says.

      • Anonymous

        If we are ever waiting on the MSM to hold Democrats to the same standards they do Republicans then we would never win elections. Republicans win in spite of the media, not because of it. Never have. Never will.

        The question is not whether Obama’s biography is a legitimate issue. The question is, for Team Romney, is it an effective issue. Two different standards. I submit that if Romeny allowed his campaign to get in the weeds on such an issue it would not be effective and would only serve to allow Obama to avoid his record and failures over the last three years. Team Romney should run from it like they are running for their lives. Four years ago Obama was an unknown, a blank slate. Biography mattered. Today Obama is the incumbent President of the United States, with a very poor record of accomplishment and economic success. Obama’s biography is irrelevant at this point. The liberal MSM would love for Republicans to take their eye off the flat slow fastball that is Obamanomics.

  • Neil

    That’s it? That’s all the Romney campaign could come up with? With all that is out there to sink this president? The Keystone pipeline? Tax cuts? And “replace” Obamacare? Don’t you need to repeal it first? This ad, along with Romney’s latest repudiation of a nonexistent “Rev. Wright” campaign is a clear indication that what we conservatives have running for president is McCain 2.0 – boy is this disappointing. Although not unexpected, given the establishment continues to pick the Republican presidential candidate. Let’s hope 4 more years of Obama finally prove the establishment a complete failure. Rubio 2016.

    • Anonymous

      I also found it interesting that Mitt is backing away from the Executive Order to repeal ObamaCare on Day One.

      • Whodat

         I do not find much difference between “repeal” and “replace”. I do not understand your problem with it.  America wanted some form of healthcare reform.  We got more than we bargained for, but we still want the thing reformed.  I have no initial problem with the semantics of replacing until I see what the plan is.  If it starts with tort reform and firing squads for cheaters, I’m all in!

        • Anonymous

          People are still fighting the arguments and debates of the primary campaign.

          • Anonymous

            It just proves that Romney is being Romney and changing his stance in order to get elected… AGAIN.

        • Anonymous

          In the debates he stated over and over that he would sign an executive order on day one to repeal.

          Having to go through Congress with a replacement plan is completely different.
          Replace it with what?  RomneyCare?

  • Neil

    That’s it? That’s all the Romney campaign could come up with? With all that is out there to sink this president? The Keystone pipeline? Tax cuts? And “replace” Obamacare? Don’t you need to repeal it first? This ad, along with Romney’s latest repudiation of a nonexistent “Rev. Wright” campaign is a clear indication that what we conservatives have running for president is McCain 2.0 – boy is this disappointing. Although not unexpected, given the establishment continues to pick the Republican presidential candidate. Let’s hope 4 more years of Obama finally prove the establishment a complete failure. Rubio 2016.

    • Anonymous

      I also found it interesting that Mitt is backing away from the Executive Order to repeal ObamaCare on Day One.

      • Whodat

         I do not find much difference between “repeal” and “replace”. I do not understand your problem with it.  America wanted some form of healthcare reform.  We got more than we bargained for, but we still want the thing reformed.  I have no initial problem with the semantics of replacing until I see what the plan is.  If it starts with tort reform and firing squads for cheaters, I’m all in!

        • Anonymous

          People are still fighting the arguments and debates of the primary campaign.

          • Anonymous

            It just proves that Romney is being Romney and changing his stance in order to get elected… AGAIN.

        • Anonymous

          In the debates he stated over and over that he would sign an executive order on day one to repeal.

          Having to go through Congress with a replacement plan is completely different.
          Replace it with what?  RomneyCare?

  • Whodat

    The Romney ad.  I like it.

    Hits the priorities. Keep ‘em coming!

    Christi video.  Yawn.  So what. Cavorting with the enemy is not entertaining to me.

    Liberal babe? Didn’t watch.  Don’t need whatever data might be there.

    • Gururussell

      Don’t tell Brian, but I think that Christie is a “girther”.

  • Whodat

    The Romney ad.  I like it.

    Hits the priorities. Keep ‘em coming!

    Christi video.  Yawn.  So what. Cavorting with the enemy is not entertaining to me.

    Liberal babe? Didn’t watch.  Don’t need whatever data might be there.

    • Gururussell

      Don’t tell Brian, but I think that Christie is a “girther”.