world

Romney sweeps 5 states; promises 'better America'

56 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2012 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

56 Comments
Login to comment

Less than 9 months to wait now!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

He's the only candidate left in the race, and he racked up only 58% of the vote in Pennsylvania. Resounding in its hollowness!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Romney sweeps 5 states

Today's linguistic moment. For me at least, when you win a contest without competitors, it can be called a win, but not a sweep.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

it can be called a win, but not a sweep.

No, it was called a sweep because there were 5 states and he carried them all.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

No, it was called a sweep because there were 5 states and he carried them all.

Yes, I see that, but I can't think of another example in which a sweep doesn't imply opposition.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Yes, I see that, but I can't think of another example in which a sweep doesn't imply opposition.

Gingrich and Paul haven't dropped out of the race yet.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Gingrich and Paul haven't dropped out of the race yet.

Ahhh. Okay, I stand corrected.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Okay, then: time to shake that Etch-a-Sketch and create a whole brand-new Mitt! Let's guess: "compassionate conservative," though undoubtedly not in those words - people are still a bit sensitive to how things turned out last time.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The only way Mitt Romney could actually improve the nation would be to ignore everything he is and everything he does, to start coming up with ideas instead of insisting his platform is "I'm not doing what that guy did", and to try and relate to to common person, which he absolutely cannot. In short, welcome back Obama for another four years. If there's any plus to that for Romney is that he'll have four years to try and learn how to say he's going to improve the nation and give examples of how he'll do it.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Obama won the presidency in 2008 in the midst of the worst recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s, and since then economic growth has rebounded slowly and joblessness has receded gradually

Man, the Obama MSM dog walkers are out in force on this one.

Economic Growth after The Great Depression. In 1934, 35 and 36 our economy grew at 11 percent, 9 percent and 13 percent. Economic growth in 2010 was 3 percent. In 2011 it was 1.7 percent. This year we are running between 2 percent and 3 percent.

Young Americans and Ethnic Jobless Rates. For people age 20-24 the unemployment rate is 13 percent. For Hispanic teenagers it is 30.5 percent. For black teenagers is 37.9 percent.

One news organization's pants are on fire.

RR

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

RR, good cherry-picking there! You'll notice you've chosen the years from 1934 - after Roosevelt became president.

1930 - GNP falls 9.4 percent; 1931 - GNP falls 8.5 percent; 1932 - GNP falls13.4 percent; 1933 - GNP it dips only 2.1 after Roosevelt's election and "First 100 Days" of intensive legislative activity.

Too bad the Republicans in Congress obstructed such legislation; today would have been more similar to the period you chose to highlight. But then, that is not the goal of Republicans in Congress; their goal is to defeat Obama.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

If he's another Bush, people of the world will sideline the US in foreign policy, now they have been vaccinated by the past rouge presidents.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

"too many Americans out there looking for work"

When is the unemployment rate going to drop to what it was during the Bush years?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Romney may have won these several states. Then again, there have been a lot of voting irregularities in more than a few of the caucuses and primaries. For example, 20 of 24 bound delegates were awarded to a candidate other than Romney, but the media has reported that candidate as receiving zero. The race is far from over. Romney has failed to really get the majority of Republicans to strongly support him. The candidate not mentioned, however, has had rally after rally in every state attended by thousands of ardent supporters yet has been blacked out by corporate media. If Romney becomes the Republican candidate, he will lose even though Obama is in the doghouse even with many of his previous supporters. This race is very far from over despite what the media wants the public to believe.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

smithinjapan

The only way Mitt Romney could actually improve the nation would be to ignore everything he is and everything he does, to start coming up with ideas instead of insisting his platform is "I'm not doing what that guy did", and to try and relate to to common person, which he absolutely cannot.

Obama is the one who can't relate. Far less than one percent of us had his bizarre upbringing - - abandoned by his Marxist Mohammedan father (a polygamist), then dragged around the world by his mother, named Stanley, who married a succession of third world losers. Frist American president to have been schooled in a madrass and to have eaten dog. Back in Hawaii Obama attended one of the most exclusive prep schools in the nation. A couple years partying at Occidental in Cali and then mysteriously he gets into Columbia and , though an average student there, Harvard takes him. Folks are tired of his aloof, out of touch, thin skinned demeanor and the constant lecturing about the need for Americans to tighten their belts while he vacations four times a year and golfs more in three years than Bush did in eight.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

You just know that as the election nears that gas prices will magically fall, the unemployment rate will suddenly drop 2%, student loans will no longer have to be paid off after a certain point, etc. All the convenient timing and manipulation in politics makes me sick.

That being said...

While I don't necessary care for Romney, I have little doubt he will be better than Obama.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

But Lieb, he looks great in a pair of boardshorts and can cut a rip with a bodyboard! Perhaps you do not understand where America is now.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But Lieb, he looks great in a pair of boardshorts and can cut a rip with a bodyboard! Perhaps you do not understand where America is now.

laguna,

Your a little late, Washington Post in 2008 told us how his great his pecks where after he was elected.

But one habit endures: Obama has gone to the gym for about 90 minutes a day, for at least 48 days in a row. He has always treated exercise less as recreation than requirement, but his devotion has intensified during the last few months. Between workout during his Hawaii vacation this week, he was photographed looking like the paradigm of a new kind of presidential fitness, one geared less toward preventing heart attacks than winning swimsuit competitions. The sun glinted off his chiseled pectorals sculpted during four weightlifting sessions each week, and a body toned by regular treadmill runs and basketball games.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/24/AR2008122402590.html

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Far less than one percent of us had his bizarre upbringing..schooled in a madrass and to have eaten dog

How can Romney possibly promise a "better America" when the people who join him in opposition to our president are so incontrovertibly scum-laden. You look over in Romney's direction and it reeks of sulfur.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

When is the unemployment rate going to drop to what it was during the Bush years?

What was the unemployment rate when Bush took office in January 2001? (4.7) What was it when he left office in January of 2009? (7+ percent and rising rapidly).

So much for the Bush years.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

While I don't necessary care for Romney, I have little doubt he will be better than Obama.

Romney and Obama are very similar. They would be equally disastrous for America, and the rest of the world.

Then again, there have been a lot of voting irregularities in more than a few of the caucuses and primaries. For example, 20 of 24 bound delegates were awarded to a candidate other than Romney, but the media has reported that candidate as receiving zero. The race is far from over.

Yeah, and "that candidate" is said to only have 75 delegates, without even mentioning that this is only an "estimate". And on a recent CNN website listing the delegate counts of the candidates, this candidate was not even included in the list.

I am sure that this candidate, Dr. Ron Paul, is second in terms of delegates and he is not all that far from Romney. The powers that be are clearly worried that he might actually win it, that is why they continue to resort to deceptive tactics.

The candidate not mentioned, however, has had rally after rally in every state attended by thousands of ardent supporters yet has been blacked out by corporate media.

Romney can't get large crowds of supporters. At least once, he resorted to breaking the law by giving away free food to for votes.

I would not be surprised if it will end up being Hillary (oh no!) versus Paul.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Romney and Obama are very similar.

Yes, about as similar as day and night.

I am sure that this candidate, Dr. Ron Paul, is second in terms of delegates

Yes, well, when you use such wonderful sources as the "Lemony Fresh Blog of News that Most People Don't Know About But is Really the Best Source for News in the Whole Wide World", I am sure that is what you might think. However, you would be wrong. Actually sources put him nowhere near that and for good reason. Very few people are interested in him.

I would not be surprised if it will end up being Hillary (oh no!) versus Paul.

? This does not even make any sense. Hillary is not running. Consider only taking half a dose for a while.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Department of Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is on record saying "no one knows" if gasoline prices in the United States will reach $9 per gallon, and acknowledged that the possibility is outside his control.

Leadership !

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

How can Romney possibly promise a "better America" when the people who join him in opposition to our president are so incontrovertibly scum-laden

HAte is all the let has now...

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Romney supporters are - well, breathtaking - in their comments as he's reached he's zenith. On cringes at how they'll react from now, as his trajectory plummets.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"HAte is all the let has now..."

Is that an anagram or something?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Actually sources put him nowhere near that and for good reason. Very few people are interested in him.

You are wrong. Paul generates huge crowds wherever he goes (you would not know this by watching the MSM). Romney has to break the law and bribe people to vote for him. The MSM have always used dirty tricks against Paul, including coming up with bogus delegate counts. If the MSM had any integrity, Paul would be in a clear lead.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

"(you would not know this by watching the MSM)."

I'm just wondering how you kid yourself that huge crowds of people could somehow be covered up.

The mainstream media pimps itself to whatever news sells. Ron Paul attracting crowds would be such an instance.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

You are wrong. Paul generates huge crowds wherever he goes

Most people can't understand the self-delusion of the Paul zealot, and therefore won't consider him. Where we see a modest gathering, they see multitudes. Blaming the media for not being taken in by the self-hallucination is a nice touch.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

GNP it dips only 2.1 after Roosevelt's election and "First 100 Days" of intensive legislative activity. Too bad the Republicans in Congress obstructed such legislation

Laguna, you do know that the democrats controlled both the House and the Senate during Obama's "First 100 Days" as CEO of the USA.

RR

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Laguna, you do know that the democrats controlled both the House and the Senate during Obama's "First 100 Days" as CEO of the USA.

Gee, Romeo, you realize that the 73rd congress of 1933 had a 63-47% advantage and was thus filibuster-proof? The 111th congress had a simple majority. (Read: they could not prevent the Republican filibuster.)

Do you actually expect people to be as ignorant of history and the congressional process as you've displayed here?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Most people can't understand the self-delusion of the Paul zealot, and therefore won't consider him. Where we see a modest gathering, they see multitudes. Blaming the media for not being taken in by the self-hallucination is a nice touch.

Excellent response. I will also never understand the need of some people to attempt to spoon feed us their theories of which media would should be watching, especially when they finally do suggest a media outlet and it turns out to be a blog run by some guy in his mother's basement connecting to the internet with a twenty year old modem.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Obama will win, Mitt Romney is bad for America.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

"Mitt Romney is bad for America"

I say let's give him a shot. Because Obama has been a disaster. Look at the U.S. gov't record debt and the teetering economy.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Yes, Obama has been a disaster; and Romney is not much different so he will be equally disastrous.

Most people can't understand the self-delusion of the Paul zealot, and therefore won't consider him.

Indeed, because the media has been either ignoring or attacking him from the start. Those who only use the MSM for their info will not understand why Paul is the only valid choice.

Where we see a modest gathering, they see multitudes.

Again, the MSM will never show you the large crowds (thousands!) coming to listen to Paul, even standing in heavy rain for hours. The MSM will never tell you that Paul is the preferred candidate.

Blaming the media for not being taken in by the self-hallucination is a nice touch.

Have a look at dailypaul.com and you will see these massive crowds, you will understand that we are not hallucinating.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

What's he promising now? Obama will win in a landslide. I don't think Americans are buying any of the faces that Romney becomes on a daily basis. 4 more years of moderate conservatism and nothing getting done awaits.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Guilty Party

MSM...MSM...MSM...

Why do you feel the need to educate us on the media? Do you think we need to be spoon-fed? Just give your opinion. No need to tell us how or what to think about the media, especially when you clearly do think they tell the truth since you often quote them when it suits your purposes. So please stop telling people what to think about the media and just give your opinion about the stories here instead. Is that too much to ask?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Have a look at dailypaul.com

Why? That site has nothing directly to do with the man. The site claims to be 'inspired by him', but it is not his official site. Why should we believe some blog that even the man has nothing to do with?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Have a look at dailypaul.com and you will see these massive crowds, you will understand that we are not hallucinating.

I've looked at the "Philadelphia Storm" meeting at the dailypaul.com site and anyone who thinks that's a "massive crowd" is certainly hallucinating. It's OK, because Ron Paul wants to decriminalize drugs, and then people can imagine his crowds are even bigger.

The media reports "news" -- and when you've seen one modest Ron Paul turnout, you've seen them all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush was the disaster that kept on giving even after Obama came in. Obama HAS improved things. Not as much as we all would have liked, but consider the obstructionism. Romney will do what ALL Republican presidents have done. That is, give to the rich and ignore the poor. The total destruction of America's Middle Class is at the top of the Republican agenda.

"I'll consider Corporations people when Texas executes one."

0 ( +2 / -2 )

"Obama HAS improved things"

He hasn't improved gov't finances, that's for sure.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Why should we believe some blog that even the man has nothing to do with?

Sites like dailypaul.com provide photos and videos showing the massive support Paul has. Photos and videos of thousands of people coming to listen to Paul talk. Yabits did manage to find one where Paul did not get the several thousand crowd, people had to stand under heavy rain, still a larger crowd that Romney usually gets, even when he resorts to bribing the voters with free food (illegal).

Some are trying very hard to convince people that its a done deal, with Romney winning the Rep nomination. But Paul is still very much in the race, he's picking up many more delegates than the media is indicating. The latest Ben Swann Reality Check covers more of the dirty tricks against Paul and some updates regarding actual delegates.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Sites like dailypaul.com provide photos and videos showing the massive support Paul has. Photos and videos of thousands of people coming to listen to Paul talk.

As Yabits points out, there were no such photos on that site. Links some. I do not think they exist beyond the minds of Paul supporters.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

As Yabits points out, there were no such photos on that site.

No, Yabits stated that he found one example where the crowd was not in the thousands. And as I pointed out, in that case the crowd had to stand in heavy rain, that is why it was not in the thousands. But the site does include many other examples of crowds in the several thousands coming to listen to Dr. Paul talk. You can criticize the creator of the website all you want, the pictures and videos are there, and they are real. Romney can't get anything close to the crowds Paul gets.

For someone who is so sure that Paul is not the right choice, its very surprising that you are not aware of the huge crowds Paul attracts.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

large crowds (thousands!) coming to listen to Paul, even standing in heavy rain for hours.

First of all, you claimed that there were thousands even standing in the heavy rain for hours. There were not. I looked that the videos and photos and the numbers claimed are incorrect. In the UT video, it is claimed 6,000 attended. Looking at the video I get the distinct impression that some Paul supporters either cannot count or refused to count correctly. At any rate, there are no huge Paul crowds to be aware of, that is why these not huge crowds are not mentioned in the media.

Ron Paul has not been chosen by the US voter as the right choice and that is why he will not be elected as president. It has nothing to do with bogus claims of the media not wanting him to be seen. If there were interest, the media would be interested.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Ron Paul has not been chosen by the US voter as the right choice and that is why he will not be elected as president. It has nothing to do with bogus claims of the media not wanting him to be seen. If there were interest, the media would be interested.

The anti-Paul media bias is obvious. There are countless examples of dirty tricks by the media to discredit him.

According to a number of poles, Paul has a better chance to beat Obama than Romney.

There is a strong anti-Romney sentiment. If Romney is chosen as the Rep candidate, Obama will win, that would be terrible.

If Paul is chosen as the Rep candidate, he will likely beat Obama, and America's greatness will be restored.

Anyway, having read some of your posts in recent days, I think I understand why you are so much against Paul. It must be because he wants to cut all foreign aid, including that given to your beloved Israel.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The anti-Paul media bias is obvious.

Yes, amazingly, you are unsuccessful at showing it.

There are countless examples of dirty tricks by the media to discredit him.

Not showing a small group of supporters listening to him speak is not a dirty trick.

According to a number of poles

They are called polls, you don't swing from them. The Republicans have a primary and the winner is Romney.

America's greatness will be restored.

I do not think isolationism and the legalization of marijuana will restore America's greatness. Quite th e opposite actually.

It must be because he wants to cut all foreign aid,

Yes, I am not ashamed to say I am against isolationism. So are most Republicans. Thus, Romney will win the nomination.

your beloved Israel.

Don't know where you got that idea. It's just another country to me. I get the feeling it somehow means more to you, though. Why would that be?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Ben,

You are mistaking isolationism with interventionism. Paul is the least isolationist in the bunch, what he is against is interventionism.

Regarding the crowds, the video you looked at has over one thousand people clearly visible in the video. If you look at it closely, you should (but YOU probably won't) notice from the camera position that it cannot capture the main crowd. The more than a thousand visible in the video is a fraction of the actual crowd. The 6000 count was not determined simply by watching a video.

Paul gets large crowds wherever he goes. The dailypaul.com has plenty of examples of that; and they also show images of the dismal crowds supporting Romney. You found that one video that showed a small part of the audience on the side, and your friend yabits found that one video where the audience was standing in heavy rain.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

You are mistaking isolationism with interventionism.

I have read quite a bit about Ron Paul, his policies are isolationist in nature.

the video you looked at has over one thousand people clearly visible in the video.

Not at all close.

You found that one video that showed a small part of the audience on the side, and your friend yabits found that one video where the audience was standing in heavy rain.

We did not find anything. You suggested we go and look and we went and looked and what is claimed is not what is true.

While Ron Paul may be a nice fellow, he does not have policies that will improve things.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@BenJack

We seem to see eye to eye on Ron Paul. He's a nice man, and is the most honourable of the men running for president, but isolationism doesn't work. I do not want him to win, and he won't.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Mitt Romney is a carpet bagger! Smiling to all of us with them lovely teeth, ready to sell anybody the Brooklyn Bridge, but only if the PRICE IS RIGHT?? What kind of idiot fools would even think of giving away their votes for this scum bag??? Too many off shore bank accounts when he should be PAYING US TAXES on this $$$!!!!!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I have read quite a bit about Ron Paul, his policies are isolationist in nature.

The same people who do not want Paul as president will call him that, but they (and you) are wrong. He wants to be friends and deal with other nations (even Iran), Paul is the least isolationist in the bunch. However, unlike other candidates and Obama, he does not want to bully and occupy other nations, he is against interventionism. There is a reason why the US is very much hated in the world, and its not because they hate their freedom.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The same people who do not want Paul as president will call him that, but they (and you) are wrong.

No, they are not wrong, which is why Ron Paul will not win. He is an isolationist. He is the most isolationist presidential candidate running in this election. He is very clear about his policies, even if you are not.

Also, I would venture that the US is not hated nearly as much by the rest of the world as some claim.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

All American candidates are isolationists, as demonstrated by polices that only focus on America, and don't take into account the other 95% of the planet.

Invading other countries at will, using dodgy facts to justify negative behaviour, and ignoring the perils that the rest of the world is raising.

Of course US politics are welcome to do this, but the US will be more and more ignored, as it moves away from the mainstream.

Cheer on whoever you want, but just make sure they don't get in the way of progress for us again. I'm sure it'll have fair-weather 'friends' as long as it's got money. But that seems to be vanishing fast, and without money it will just be the bully left.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“As I look around at the millions of Americans without work, the graduates who can’t get a job, the soldiers who return home to an unemployment line, it breaks my heart,” he said.

From Mitt's perspective, that's thousands of people he could have fired himself but missed the chance. I can see why he's taking it so hard.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@The Truth Matters

From Mitt's perspective, that's thousands of people he could have fired himself but missed the chance. I can see why he's taking it so hard.

Good one, but Mitt's remarks -- "This does not have to be. It is the result of failed leadership and of a faulty vision.” -- requires some comment too.

The failed leadership and faulty vision can't be blamed on President Obama. He inherited the worst economic conditions the United States has faced since the Great Depression and has performed extremely well in keeping the nation out of the abyss. Yes, the president can be faulted for not getting the unemployment rate down as far as he would have hoped.

But look at the people criticizing him: Where was their vision and leadership in 2001 when they took a nation with surpluses "as far as the eye could see," and sailed it into the rocks like an Italian cruise ship captain?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites