Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Republicans Choose Mitt Romney 2016


Yamato

Recommended Posts

A new poll released Wednesday morning found Republican voters are still inclined to back some familiar names in the 2016 presidential race.

Two-time presidential candidate Mitt Romney led the crowded field with 19% support, the Quinnipiac University survey found. The runner-up was former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush ®, the brother and son of two recent presidents, with 11%.

Meanwhile, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie ® and Dr. Ben Carson, a prominent conservative activist, each had 8% support in the poll. No other Republican candidate topped 6%.

Incidentally, by "no other Republican", they mean Rand Paul. The poll results suggest Lindsey Graham is right. Republicans have repudiated Rand Paul and the Tea Party wing of the party. Looks like my criticism of the Republican party for the past 12-24 months is shaping up to be deserved as usual.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like once you've found the perfect candidate who represents your values and beliefs, there's just no need to go find anyone else. Republicans are certainly dumb enough to run another Bush on the ticket as well. Nothing says "No" to a Democratic Dynasty like a Republican Dynasty after all.

And it's this century's nightmare, Jihadism.

You're a Republican and you approve this message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're a Republican and you approve this message.

Didn't it say only 19%?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

can anyone see fail writen all over it???

YES
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weird Paul seems to lead the way when Romney is not on the list

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/poll-hillary-clinton-leads-democrats-rand-paul-leads-gop-quinnipiac-108645.html

I think its just a matter of name recognition.

When the time comes as it gets closer and be becomes more well known. They will come

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're the one who said "only". "Only" relative to what?

Umm...well....hmmm...let me see.... the other 81% perhaps?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr.Romney gets 19% support ???? that's less than 1 in 5 people, which in my world is not exactly a winning bet. Why can't America choose a candidate who will WIN, Mr.Romney is a two time loser and will be an unfair match against a Democratic contender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weird Paul seems to lead the way when Romney is not on the list

http://www.politico....iac-108645.html

I think its just a matter of name recognition.

When the time comes as it gets closer and be becomes more well known. They will come

Not only is Mitt Romney not on that list, that list was from five months ago. A repudiation would mean the opposite of growing popularity through time. I think it's fair to say that Republican support for Rand Paul (the corresponding lack thereof in almost 95% of Republicans polled) has more to do with Republicans and Rand Paul than Mitt Romney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing how Romney has already stated he is not running again, this is a nonissue. Other then the fact that they would support that kind of candidate in the first place...

Edited by spartan max2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Umm...well....hmmm...let me see.... the other 81% perhaps?

Oh yeah, as if the other 81% is so vindicated for not choosing Mitt Romney. The other 81% minus 6% didn't choose Rand Paul either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing how Romney has already stated he is not running again, this is a nonissue. Other then the fact that they would support that kind of candidate in the first place...

Other then the fact that they would STILL support that kind of candidate in 2014 demonstrates how stuck on the Obushma this sad clown party really is.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, as if the other 81% is so vindicated for not choosing Mitt Romney. The other 81% minus 6% didn't choose Rand Paul either.

Maybe you should put your energy into volunteering for the Rand Paul campaign instead of polarizing the issues between the R's and D's. :tu:

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only is Mitt Romney not on that list, that list was from five months ago. A repudiation would mean the opposite of growing popularity through time. I think it's fair to say that Republican support for Rand Paul (the corresponding lack thereof in almost 95% of Republicans polled) has more to do with Republicans and Rand Paul than Mitt Romney.

My point is 11% to less then 6% drop in five months is pretty drastic and its not like Paul has done a whole lot. The only difference is the added Romney who altered 19% of the vote. But im a more optimistic person anyways.

At the end of the day these are small numbers and there is a long way to go

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you should put your energy into volunteering for the Rand Paul campaign instead of polarizing the issues between the R's and D's. :tu:

Why would I become politically active? That would be like getting an STD. I don't even know if I can vote for Rand Paul. I might hold my nose and do it, I just might.

And really? Where did I EVER polarize ANY issue between the R's and the D's? They're two equally stupid groups leading this country to failure with the same reckless abandon. I'm the one on the board that does the exact opposite of polarizing issues between R's and D's.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And really? Where did I EVER polarize ANY issue between the R's and the D's?

You do seem to enjoy agitating both groups and watching them go at each other.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do seem to enjoy agitating both groups and watching them go at each other.

Like when? Where? And what issue? I think you've definitely gotten me mixed up with someone else. Actually they're already agitated, and they're wasting their time by going at each other. Reminding them of that may not be the kind of agitation they were looking for.

I think they're after the kind of agitation that agrees with their preconceived partisan sensibilities. The kind that makes them waste their time, the kind that makes them go at each other, the kind that polarizes the issues between the R's and the D's.

For instance, any post by Merc14.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you consider only 36% of Americans voted this mid-term and assume approximately 1/2 voted democrat than that would mean 18% of America voted in our current congress. That 19% means more than you think.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you consider only 36% of Americans voted this mid-term and assume approximately 1/2 voted democrat than that would mean 18% of America voted in our current congress. That 19% means more than you think.

If you just crunch numbers, yes, if you consider that most of those participating in a poll don't go to vote, no.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that case I'd like to congratulate Hilary Clinton on her win and in becoming the first female President of the United States of America and to commiserate with the people of the United States on America.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can we extrapolate these results to a much larger population? If the sample size is large and random enough and the distributions are normal, yeah go for it. It'll be no worse than any other statistical analysis. Politicians who win polls like this with healthy numbers like 19% later go on to become top contenders in the general election so I think there's some predictive power in every well-done poll, but especially in this one where Mitt Romney may even be an outlier to the upside, statistically speaking.

The differences in the numbers between the candidates is what's most noteworthy about this poll to me. Not whether Mitt Romney is going to run again or not, but where Republicans' heads are, gauged by their choices in polls like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like when? Where? And what issue? I think you've definitely gotten me mixed up with someone else. Actually they're already agitated, and they're wasting their time by going at each other. Reminding them of that may not be the kind of agitation they were looking for.

I think they're after the kind of agitation that agrees with their preconceived partisan sensibilities. The kind that makes them waste their time, the kind that makes them go at each other, the kind that polarizes the issues between the R's and the D's.

For instance, any post by Merc14.

Don't play coy...you go after both R's and D's as vehemently as anyone from either of those parties.

Now, if you'll excuse me I have to take care of dinner.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bwahahahahaha. Mitt Romney. That's all. No intelligent post. Though I might have been swayed more by Rand Paul.

Edited by Aus Der Box Skeptisch
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that case I'd like to congratulate Hilary Clinton on her win and in becoming the first female President of the United States of America and to commiserate with the people of the United States on America.

When she laughed on camera upon hearing breaking news that Gaddaffi was murdered I knew right then and there she would be awarded ... er win the POTUS election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.