Freeper concedes 2012: "Mitt will end up as the GOP nominee and Obama will get another 4 years"

[Amerigo Vespucci]

From the freeper thread "Iowa: Romney 23%, Gingrich 20%, Paul 18% (Rasmussen)"

To: floridarunner01

Gingrich didn’t lose his support, they just moved to the undecided column, and will return after considering the alternatives.

Romney is about where he has been all year, low 20’s

8 posted on Thu Dec 15 2011 06:04:19 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by TexasFreeper2009 (Newt Gingrich 2012!)

***

To: lexington minuteman 1775

Plan b is that no one has voted yet, backmann and santorum are still there, vote for them, they are the two conservatives.

20 posted on Thu Dec 15 2011 06:15:56 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by "AMNESTY" Newt, Willard, Perry and his fellow supporters)

To: no dems

Mitt will end up as the GOP nominee and Obama will get another 4 years.

36 posted on Thu Dec 15 2011 06:29:36 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by LuvFreeRepublic

***

To: deport

This is obviously a skewed poll. Rasmussen has been known to get it completely wrong countless times.

For Gingrich to go from over 35%, to being down over 15 points in one day, there is something totally wrong with the poll.

Rasmussen also has his own agenda and he uses it in the early polling season, then tightens it up when his reputation is at stake. His polling method is also rather flawed compared to others.

I say, if this trend continues for another 2 weeks, from all the polls, then there is a problem for Newt.

46 posted on Thu Dec 15 2011 06:36:24 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)

[rfranklin]

1. They were losers before it even started...

but we all knew that.

[elleng]

2. As Coulter said.

[Ron Green]

3. I think this freeper's got it about right.

I just hope we'll see some REAL socialism in the next four.

[Sherman A1]

4. Even a bit of an improvement would be

a bit of an improvement.

[dana stevens]

7. Desire for Socialism...Really??

Your comment, "you hope for REAL socialism" makes no sense to me. Socialism is not all about the goodies you get from others'; you are condemning yourself to live at the mercy of others. You sell your soul for a few crumbs of so called healthcare, and a marginal living standard. What kind of person willingly sells themselves, along with all their family and countrymen, into slavery?

I really really really wish people on this site would become familiar with David Hume's "is / ought" fallacy so you will realize that what you think "ought to be" i.e. socialism, can not be gotten by an "is", i.e. what we have. It is not possible to move to an "ought from an is", so to continue down the path of absurdity is mind boggling.

This is no different than the ideology espoused by libertarians that think they can get to some hackneyed idea of a pure capitalism; It is a farce on both your parts. Ideologies can not form the way you assume them to be. They will NEVER look like you think they "ought".

Wake up and smell your fallacy........

[Ron Green]

8. Of course I was referring to the accusation from idiots on the right

that Obama's a "socialist." Your rather stilted and indignant reply seems to show you didn't understand the tone of my post.

[Initech]

5. A clown car can only hold so many fools...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. On A Ship Of Fools Mittens Is The Least Foolish.

He is the candidate I would least want to run against. Against Mittens. the president will be a slight favorite. Against all the others he would be a prohibitive favorite.

[pintobean]

9. Freepers are sooo smart, we should quote them often.

[Matariki]

10. And you can substitute that with any of the other clowns running

and still be correct.

[Boston_Chemist]

11. I agree at least with 50% of what that Freeper said.

Obama will get reelected.

The GOP's current batch is as idiotic as I've ever seen it. Too many debates, too many discredited names, too many flubs, it all makes me wonder: Who is running the show over there? Was Michael Steele a mole, as I've been suspecting? Has the GOP finally jumped the shark?

Stay tuned.