Why George Bush does not campaign for ROMNEY ? - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

HelmutKohl · 11-06-2012, 08:34 AM

So far so good, at least in betting world :-)

Presidential Election Winner Updated at: 10:33 AM, InTrade.com

Barack Obama
73.0%
Today's Change: +4.8
Shares Traded: 3,562,903

Mitt Romney
27.2%
Today's Change: -5.7

KillerK · 11-06-2012, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

You are very much Republican.

The way the current system works is the rich walk through loop wholes a mile long. I'm not being punished for being successful, I'm getting richer and richer while the poor continue to live in section eight housing.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like generations of people living on welfare either. But is Romney going to change that? Obama? The next President? The one after him? Nope.

Making the point of what? That we had a decent president in office and all the Republican party could do about it was expose him getting a fucking blow job? That was the lowest point in American politics, worse than Nixon.

President Bush brought the country to it's knees, and dragged the entire world down with it. The shit we are still going through today is because of President Bush. He destroyed us. He was at the helm when this all went down.

Why in the world do you think Obama has Clinton - the President who was impeached - campaigning for him yet there is zero mention of Bush during the entire Romney campaign.

Bullshit, Clinton was the cause of it. Bush sure didn't stop it from happening.

Also, you say shit is so good now, you have neighbors now and businesses.

epitome · 11-06-2012, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Hammer

I'm not saying give small businesses a free ride, I'm saying not to tax them to death.

I'm not against welfare, I'm against the way it is currently handled.

They aren't being taxed to death. If you are feeling like you are being taxed to death that is because you are failing at business.

Robbie · 11-06-2012, 12:00 PM

For the same reason that Gore didn't want Clinton anywhere near him in 2000 (Clinton was still disgraced at the time he left office) and didn't have him as part of the campaign at all.

And the same reason that Carter to this very day is not wanted in campaigning or at the Democrat Convention.

Bush is in the same boat at the moment. He is a negative. Why would Romney want a negative like that?

He doesn't. Just like Clinton WAS a negative in 2000 for Gore, and Carter would be a negative for Obama now.

2012 · 11-06-2012, 12:34 PM

because Bush was a major factor in why we're in this shit mess ? could that have something to do with it ?

Robbie · 11-06-2012, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2012

because Bush was a major factor in why we're in this shit mess ? could that have something to do with it ?

No, Bush is a major factor we went to war for no real reason and have lost so many of our personal freedoms.

This "shit mess" was caused by the housing market collapsing...which was caused by Congressional legislation deregulating it that began when Clinton was still President (and no, Clinton had nothing to do with it either...it was CONGRESS)

sperbonzo · 11-06-2012, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madm1k3

Epic fail

Carter: has been a vocal advocate of every candidate since he lost

Reagan: Went all over the Country for Bush Sr in 1988, then did again in 1992.... proof you say:

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/11/01/us...-in-south.html

https://youtube.com/watch?v=tiNVq...feature=fvwrel

George HW Bush: Campaigned for his son and endorses Mitt Romney live on CNN

https://youtube.com/watch?v=mJNI1qw0l04

Clinton: Campaign Machine

W: ?

So I guess you meant dead presidents like Nixon or Ford?

LOL... Ok. Fair enough. I capitulate the point.

.

GAMEFINEST · 11-06-2012, 01:25 PM

too much negative view

LAJ · 11-06-2012, 03:54 PM

Gore would have won in 2000 had he had Clinton helping him campaign. Well... he won anyway... but... Clinton would have helped for sure.

Clinton didn't cause any problems... the 90s was the most prosperous time in our lifetimes.

Robbie · 11-06-2012, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LAJ

Gore would have won in 2000 had he had Clinton helping him campaign. Well... he won anyway... but... Clinton would have helped for sure.

Clinton didn't cause any problems... the 90s was the most prosperous time in our lifetimes.

I think he made a mistake by not having Clinton with him as well...but that was his call. He decided that he didn't want to be associated with Clinton because of all the sex scandals and the WhiteWater scandal and investigations.

Clinton was a negative at that particular time...but with a few years of retrospective thought, people love him now.

And I think he would have had a positive impact for Gore as well even then.

candyflip · 11-06-2012, 04:11 PM

It's because he voted for Obama. In Fakeland.

http://dailycurrant.com/2012/11/06/g...y-votes-obama/

LAJ · 11-06-2012, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

I think he made a mistake by not having Clinton with him as well...but that was his call. He decided that he didn't want to be associated with Clinton because of all the sex scandals and the WhiteWater scandal and investigations.

Clinton was a negative at that particular time...but with a few years of retrospective thought, people love him now.

And I think he would have had a positive impact for Gore as well even then.

Yup... it was just one misstep after another for Gore, ending with not fighting the supreme court hard enough over the whole Florida debacle. Clinton would have totally had a positive impact IMO. And all Gore had to do was carry his own state and then FL would have been unnecessary.

11-06-2012, 12:00 PM	#54
Robbie Leaner, Meaner, Faster Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Vegas Posts: 20,958	For the same reason that Gore didn't want Clinton anywhere near him in 2000 (Clinton was still disgraced at the time he left office) and didn't have him as part of the campaign at all. And the same reason that Carter to this very day is not wanted in campaigning or at the Democrat Convention. Bush is in the same boat at the moment. He is a negative. Why would Romney want a negative like that? He doesn't. Just like Clinton WAS a negative in 2000 for Gore, and Carter would be a negative for Obama now. __________________ -Robbie ClaudiaMarie.Com

11-06-2012, 12:34 PM	#55
2012 So Fucking What Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 17,189	because Bush was a major factor in why we're in this shit mess ? could that have something to do with it ? __________________ best host: Webair \| best sponsor: Kink \| best coder: 688218966 \| Go Fuck Yourself

11-06-2012, 01:25 PM	#58
GAMEFINEST Make STACK$ Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: sexy time Posts: 14,418	too much negative view __________________ Compound interest.

11-06-2012, 03:54 PM	#59
LAJ Gingerific Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Austin Posts: 5,568	Gore would have won in 2000 had he had Clinton helping him campaign. Well... he won anyway... but... Clinton would have helped for sure. Clinton didn't cause any problems... the 90s was the most prosperous time in our lifetimes. __________________ YNOT.com - The original industry resource email jay at ynot dot com or skype LAJConsulting

11-06-2012, 04:11 PM	#61
candyflip Carpe Visio Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: New York Posts: 43,052	It's because he voted for Obama. In Fakeland. http://dailycurrant.com/2012/11/06/g...y-votes-obama/ __________________ Spend you some brain. Email Me

11-06-2012, 08:34 AM	#51
HelmutKohl Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 378	So far so good, at least in betting world :-) Presidential Election Winner Updated at: 10:33 AM, InTrade.com Barack Obama 73.0% Today's Change: +4.8 Shares Traded: 3,562,903 Mitt Romney 27.2% Today's Change: -5.7