Saturday, October 08, 2011

Romney Surge on Intrade: 3-to-1 Over Perry


Current odds on Intrade are 60.9% for Romney vs. 19.1% for Perry, more than 3-to-1 in favor of Romney.

26 Comments:

At 10/08/2011 10:15 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

If either is elected you can kiss the American economy and what is left of the republic bye bye.

 
At 10/08/2011 11:31 AM, Blogger AIG said...

Yes yes. Ron Paul 2012...or whatever the cool kids are saying these days.

PS: Do people like you Vangel ever get tired of their apocalyptic messianic predictions? Does it ever get old?

 
At 10/08/2011 11:56 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

PS: Do people like you Vangel ever get tired of their apocalyptic messianic predictions? Does it ever get old?

Given the fact that they have turned out to be quite accurate, no, it does not get old. We are now drowning in a sea of sovereign debt that, contrary to the idiotic pronouncements in the Basel III Agreement is not riskless. Essentially, what we have is a financial system that is bankrupt and will require a great deal of money printing and money destruction to resolve. But that resolution lies to ruin so I see the violence that I have been predicting far more likely than ever. Expect the volatility in the currency and foreign debt markets to explode. Expect a credit contraction that will force many companies to shut down and destroy millions of new job losses.

Perry, Cain, Bachman, or Romney are establishment candidates that will not help create the foundation for an eventual recovery. The only thing worse will be an Obama victory.

 
At 10/08/2011 1:11 PM, Blogger AIG said...

Yes yes. Ron Paul 2012!! Because 35 years in the government, is not "establishment" :p

PS: You people are quite nuts.

 
At 10/08/2011 1:19 PM, Blogger Benjamin said...

Rick Perry is a bilious knave, the vile excretum of a Texas GOP unable to unload its offal otherwise. It is interesting to watch Romney pull ahead--and yet the Christians are saying they will not vote for cultish Mormon.

I concur with AIG that Ron Paul is a true choice.

Otherwise we can choose between the socialist Muslim Obama, or the warmongering plutocratic homophobe creationists of the GOP.

That's a choice?

 
At 10/08/2011 3:01 PM, Blogger PFCT said...

VANGE - Get a clue! Romney is not a mainstream politician and knows more about business and economics than all the other candidates combined. I hope you're not brainwashing that fine son of yours in your photo with such nonsense and hogwash.

 
At 10/08/2011 4:23 PM, Blogger AIG said...

"and knows more about business and economics than all the other candidates combined. "

Blasphemy! No one knows more about economics than his Holiness Ron Paul! Ron Paul read a book, once. And he read the only book that matters.

Ron Paul 2016!

 
At 10/08/2011 4:47 PM, Blogger Itchy said...

In a field of unimpressive candidates, (although Cain is growing on me) Republicans are gravitating towards the Don't lose" candidate. Sure the pills show that people get excited by the new "it" person, but after the initial infatuation they settle back in to Romney.

It's like watching a football game where the leading team chooses to run three times and punt. Republicans just need to run 13 months off the clock and not lose in the process. That candidate is Romney.

 
At 10/08/2011 5:17 PM, Blogger juandos said...

"If either is elected you can kiss the American economy and what is left of the republic bye bye"...

Come on now vamgeIV its R.I.N.O. on R.I.N.O. action and its all good, clean fun... Don't jump the gun just yet...

"Ron Paul 2012..."...

Gee! I don't know AIG but it sort of sounds like the Titanic ordering out for more ice...

What do you think of Paul?

"I concur with AIG that Ron Paul is a true choice"...

Naturally the pseudo benny sees the appeal in a clueless moonbat...

"Romney is not a mainstream politician and knows more about business and economics than all the other candidates combined"...

Obviously PFCT you can't be talking about the Romney of planet earth and the one who spawned that socialist horror called 'RomneyCare', right?

 
At 10/08/2011 6:05 PM, Blogger Craig said...

Romney is not a mainstream politician and knows more about business and economics than all the other candidates combined.

Oh, puhleeze. Not mainstream? Yes, he knows a lot about business, but that does not mean he knows a thing about economics. His MassCare plan is all we need to know about to see that. His first instincts to perceived problems are to find the government-fix to them.

Unfortunately, I can't see my way clear to support Paul for anything other than Treasury or the Fed. He'd be a blessing in either. But, warmongering conservative that I am, his foreign policy is unacceptable.

I do worry about what will happen when the inevitable economic, um, unpleasantness hits us. Cain strikes me as a good free-marketer, but his time at the Fed warns me that his economic education, too, has been at the feet of the inflationists.

Will have to research that more. 9-9-9 doesn't send me much, either. I'll still take any of them over Obama (including Bachmann).

 
At 10/08/2011 6:09 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

VANGE - Get a clue! Romney is not a mainstream politician and knows more about business and economics than all the other candidates combined. I hope you're not brainwashing that fine son of yours in your photo with such nonsense and hogwash.

Romney is an insider. He knows how to function at a high level in a financial system that is dominated by a banking cartel and political operatives. But he has no idea about economics. During the last campaign he was one of the idiot candidates who thought that Ron Paul's prediction that there was a huge bubble that would end badly was extreme. Well, Dr. Paul was correct while Romney and the rest of the idiots were wrong. He would not do anything to end the problems created by the Fed and by the protected Wall Street bankers because he spent a career expecting the government to step in and save troubled businesses in which he and his partners were investing capital. He also has not realised that the US military involvement abroad is a huge threat to American solvency and that the path to prosperity lies with a hard currency that cannot be manipulated by private interests who have a monopoly on money creation.

 
At 10/08/2011 6:18 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

Blasphemy! No one knows more about economics than his Holiness Ron Paul! Ron Paul read a book, once. And he read the only book that matters.

Actually he has written a number of books that make it clear that he understands monetary, fiscal and foreign policy much better than Romney.

The Case for Gold

Pillars of Prosperity


End the Fed

Liberty Defined: 50 Essential Issues That Affect Our Freedom

The Revolution: A Manifesto

 
At 10/08/2011 6:23 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

In a field of unimpressive candidates, (although Cain is growing on me)...

Why? A few weeks before the 2008 collapse he was talking about how great the economy was. If he could not understand what was going on well enough to figure out that there was a problem a week before one of the biggest contractions in decades why should you want him as President?

http://004eeb5.netsolhost.com/hc126.htm

 
At 10/08/2011 6:31 PM, Blogger Benjamin said...

For all of my disagreements with Vange (actually, only one big one, and that is paper currency), I congratulate Vange for beig an orignal thinker, and one of the few pro-merket thinkers who recognizes the parasitic mnature of our $1 trillion-a-year defense-homeland security-VA complex. And that is not counting the $4 trillion we have spend or will spend on account of Iraqistan.

No discussion of federal fiscal austerity can take place without a serious radical downsizing of this dangerous menace to USA prosperity.

Even better, without a huge military, leaders like Bush jr, or LBJ would not be able to get us into seemingly endless wars for nothing.

Our Founding Fathers made clear they preferred a volunteer, citizen militia as the backbone of our defense, not a professional military. If you are a strict constructionist, the current mercenary force is an anathema.

A complete stand-down of the military is an interesting option, what we nearly did after WWII. Who plans to invade the USA? Who plans to shut trading lanes (China and Russia are both exporting nations).

Ron Paul is making very interesting presentations on this matter.

 
At 10/08/2011 6:34 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

Unfortunately, I can't see my way clear to support Paul for anything other than Treasury or the Fed. He'd be a blessing in either. But, warmongering conservative that I am, his foreign policy is unacceptable.

I do worry about what will happen when the inevitable economic, um, unpleasantness hits us. Cain strikes me as a good free-marketer, but his time at the Fed warns me that his economic education, too, has been at the feet of the inflationists.


But as a warmonger you have to see that foreign adventures are very expensive and will lead to the, "inevitable economic, um, unpleasantness." If you want foreign entanglements you cannot claim to be for rational fiscal and monetary policies because they are not compatible with war. You have to have an easy money Fed if you want endless adventures abroad.

 
At 10/08/2011 6:40 PM, Blogger AIG said...

"Actually he has written a number of books that make it clear that he understands monetary, fiscal and foreign policy much better than Romney."

Ron Paul is a crazy lunatic, and thats pretty much all his "books" demonstrate. But then again, so are you.

"I congratulate Vange for beig an orignal thinker,"

Like all lunatic Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, Mises dot org crowd...he regurgitates the Party Line down to the letter. What scares me most about these lunatics, is how much they resemble a gang of communists. Not a tiny bit of originality, not a tiny bit of questioning the message of the Messiah, not a tiny bit of doubt in their delusional minds.

I guess even though their Messiah has been in politics for 35 years and has gotten them nowhere, they continue to believe he is "not in the establishment", but accuse all others of being "in the establishment". No amount of arguing is going to change that.

I suspect, even when Ron Paul dies, they will run him as their candidate for president. Then...he'll REALLY be outside of the "establishment"

 
At 10/09/2011 9:50 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

Ron Paul is a crazy lunatic, and thats pretty much all his "books" demonstrate. But then again, so are you.

How interesting. The guy who gets the story right and makes accurate predictions about the economy and the wars is a lunatic while the idiots who got everything wrong are geniuses. The guy who gets twice the donations from the young men and women in the military than the rest of the field combined is unfit to lead. But the bought for candidates who would destroy the wealth of the country so that their contributors can get rich are geniuses. You certainly live in an interesting world.

 
At 10/09/2011 9:57 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

Like all lunatic Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, Mises dot org crowd...he regurgitates the Party Line down to the letter. What scares me most about these lunatics, is how much they resemble a gang of communists. Not a tiny bit of originality, not a tiny bit of questioning the message of the Messiah, not a tiny bit of doubt in their delusional minds.

You do know that there is no major difference between the socialists that you oppose on the Left and the National Socialists that you support on the right. Both set of extremists are anti-liberty and pro state. They have been accurately described as two wings of the same totalitarian bird of prey. And both have the same problem with those that favour individual liberty over the state. The difference between an Obama and a Romney is not material. They are both anti-liberty, anti-market establishment men who are incapable of original and rational thought. They are both yes-men who will do what they are told by the party insiders who are calling the shots. And neither cares one bit about the ordinary citizen in any way other than a parasite cares about a host.

 
At 10/09/2011 10:00 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

I guess even though their Messiah has been in politics for 35 years and has gotten them nowhere, they continue to believe he is "not in the establishment", but accuse all others of being "in the establishment". No amount of arguing is going to change that.

That is correct. The Republican Party has run candidates against him in the primaries and redrawn his district to make sure that he has to campaign a lot harder to win a seat, thus making him less effective as a presidential candidate. On most one sided votes in Congress he has been in the minority, often standing alone. You would know this if you actually did some research before you began your groundless attacks. But that is what a rational person would do.

 
At 10/09/2011 10:37 AM, Blogger Paul said...

Vangel,

"The guy who gets the story right and makes accurate predictions about the economy and the wars is a lunatic while the idiots who got everything wrong are geniuses."

Vangel, your master Ron Paul voted to invade Afghanistan. I know, can't be, right? Is your robot head billlowing smoke as you try to compute that?

"On most one sided votes in Congress he has been in the minority, often standing alone."

Ron Paul has spent decades in office as essentially a parasite. He renders his holy edicts, loads his district up on massive loads of pork, and never ever moves the ball up the field of liberty. He'd actually have to do some, you know, work and legislating to accomplish that. Perhaps he'd have to make some compromises now and then. Can't have that, his mindless minions would lose their shit. It's much easier to just collect his government paychecks, write articles run by white supremacist organizations, give insane answers during the Presidential debates, and prattle on about how everyone but him in government is corrupt.

 
At 10/09/2011 10:49 AM, Blogger Paul said...

Benji,

"Rick Perry is a bilious knave, the vile excretum of a Texas GOP unable to unload its offal otherwise."

And yet your boyfriend would give anything to have Perry's economic record on a national level. Perry's not perfect by any means, but he'd never would have enacted an Obamacare like health care legislation, or spent a trillion dollars on an idiotic "stimulus" that only stimulated the Democrat party parasites and rent seekers. To the contrary, Perry has enacted medical malpractice liability reform and has seen doctors move in droves to the state. He's pro-drilling and governor of what is usually considered to be the most pro-business state in the country.

You voted for the official candidate of People Magazine, the guy currently destroying the country. Why should anyone heed anything you have to say about politics now?

 
At 10/10/2011 10:39 AM, Blogger Jet Beagle said...

Both Mitt Romney and his father, George Romney, were CEO's first and then later state governors. George was also part of Richard Nixon's cabinet.

George Romney was very influential in Republican Party politics, and his influence no doubt opened doors for his son's later political endeavors.

That George and Mitt Romney were politicians does not in any way diminish their accomplishments as businessmen.

Having a true business leader in the White House would be a refreshing change, IMO. I could support either Romney or Cain over the current socialist in the oval office.

 
At 10/10/2011 10:57 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

Having a true business leader in the White House would be a refreshing change, IMO. I could support either Romney or Cain over the current socialist in the oval office.

Neither Romney nor Cain understand economics or monetary issues. Both favour a bigger state, just as Nixon did. Both cannot understand the problems created by the Fed and a fiat currency system that is backing a highly leveraged fractional reserve banking system. Both favour huge military spending and involvement in areas that the Pentagon does not understand very well.

So you will excuse me if I don't consider them an improvement over Bush or Obama, two of the worst presidents that your country has every had.

 
At 10/10/2011 11:41 AM, Blogger VangelV said...

Vangel, your master Ron Paul voted to invade Afghanistan. I know, can't be, right? Is your robot head billlowing smoke as you try to compute that?

He never supported an occupation or any notion of nation building. All he voted for was to go after al-Qaeda, which claimed responsibility for the 9/11 attacks.

Ron Paul has spent decades in office as essentially a parasite. He renders his holy edicts, loads his district up on massive loads of pork, and never ever moves the ball up the field of liberty.

He never voted for any budget that had a deficit. He opted out of the Congressional pension plan and did not take free junkets paid for by taxpayers or lobby firms.

He'd actually have to do some, you know, work and legislating to accomplish that.

He did. He sponsored a bill to take away the Fannie/Freddie implicit guarantee. He voted against occupying Iraq and Afghanistan. He sponsored a bill to audit the Fed.

Perhaps he'd have to make some compromises now and then.

Not on principle. Once you compromise on your foundation there is no reason to take you seriously.

Can't have that, his mindless minions would lose their shit. It's much easier to just collect his government paychecks, write articles run by white supremacist organizations, give insane answers during the Presidential debates, and prattle on about how everyone but him in government is corrupt.

When he said that there was a huge housing bubble and that Fannie and Freddie would lead to huge losses for taxpayers people like you said that he was insane. He was right and you are wrong. You just don't know it yet.

 
At 10/10/2011 2:38 PM, Blogger Paul said...

"All he voted for was to go after al-Qaeda, which claimed responsibility for the 9/11 attacks. "

Ha, he knew he was voting for war and whatever that entailed. It's chicken shit and dishonest now to pretend otherwise. What happened to all that nonsense about "writs of attainder" when he voted to give George Bush the power to murder poor, innocent muslims? Further, Paul voted for war and he didnt even sign up. Your master is a chicken hawk, too!

"Not on principle. Once you compromise on your foundation there is no reason to take you seriously."

So dogmatic, so make-believe is the world you live in. There is no reason to take you seriously.

"He sponsored a bill to take away the Fannie/Freddie implicit guarantee. He voted against occupying Iraq and Afghanistan. He sponsored a bill to audit the Fed."

And he's only been in office for decades! And none of those 3 things you listed came to pass. Hardest workin' man in the cuckoo caucus!

"When he said that there was a huge housing bubble and that Fannie and Freddie would lead to huge losses for taxpayers people like you said that he was insane."

People like me sold their houses at the height of the bubble and came out quite nicely. The bubble was obvious, big f'ing deal if your master saw what many, including the Bush administration, knew what was brewing. Ron Paul is a quack, and attracts an awful lot of weirdos, but he can be has a few valid positions. He just doesn't do any of the heavy lifting when it comes to making his beliefs a reality.

 
At 10/10/2011 9:05 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

Ha, he knew he was voting for war and whatever that entailed. It's chicken shit and dishonest now to pretend otherwise. What happened to all that nonsense about "writs of attainder" when he voted to give George Bush the power to murder poor, innocent muslims? Further, Paul voted for war and he didnt even sign up. Your master is a chicken hawk, too!

That is not true. George Bush ran on a policy that included opposition to nation building. It was reasonable to expect that a so-called conservative would keep such a promise. And he did argue for the use of a letter of marque that would have allowed private interests to go after the al-Qaeda perpetrators of 9-11. On the Iraq issue he stood with a very small minority when he argued that the WMD claims were a scam.

And I found it interesting that Stanley McChrystal provided a great deal of support for Dr. Paul's position on Afghanistan when he admitted that the occupation took place with a "frighteningly simplistic" view of the region. Perry, Romney, and rest of the idiots in the Republican race must be pretty pissed off at McChrystal right now. I guess that if they buy the argument that Obama is selling the US has to be in Afghanistan for another decade, after which it will still lose. Of course, the country will be broke long before then and the troops will have to be called back home no matter which neocon sock-puppet is picked as the next Blunder in Chief.

So dogmatic, so make-believe is the world you live in. There is no reason to take you seriously.

Really? Why would anyone expect it reasonable for a candidate to compromise on the issue of individual liberty? You can already be sent to jail for having too much water in your toilet tank. You already have to get irradiated and have nude pictures taken of you when you fly. You can already be sent to jail without being able to get in front of a judge and charged with a crime. You can already be executed by a secret panel that presents no evidence to any judge or is accountable to anyone. How much more of your liberty to you want to give up for the sake of compromise?

And he's only been in office for decades! And none of those 3 things you listed came to pass. Hardest workin' man in the cuckoo caucus!

He has never voted to lift the debt ceiling. He has never voted for a budget deficit. He has never voted to give taxpayer money to other nations. He has never voted for nation building or anything that is not authorised by the Constitution. The rest of the candidates and most members of Congress do not care about the Constitution. Why blame him for the corruption in Washington and the actions of the party insiders?

People like me sold their houses at the height of the bubble and came out quite nicely. The bubble was obvious, big f'ing deal if your master saw what many, including the Bush administration, knew what was brewing.

Nonsense. In the 2007 debates when Dr. Paul pointed out the problems in the housing sector and the insolvency of the financial system Romney and the other idiots laughed. If they saw the trouble they were liars who do not deserve to be President. If they did not, as they clearly indicated in the debates, they are too incompetent to understand. And let us not forget Cain, who wrote that there were no problems a week or two before the crash began. He was just as clueless as Bush and Romney.

Ron Paul is a quack, and attracts an awful lot of weirdos, but he can be has a few valid positions. He just doesn't do any of the heavy lifting when it comes to making his beliefs a reality.

He attracts people who value liberty and expect government to be constrained by the Constitution as it was written. He has the best foreign policy and economic positions of all the candidates and has been the most consistent voice of reason of anyone in Congress.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home