Today's Situation Room:

Wolf Blitzer delivers the most important breaking news and political, international, and national security stories of the day. Tune to The Situation Room weekdays 5-7pm ET on CNN.

Wolf Blitzer delivers the most important breaking news and political, international, and national security stories of the day. Tune to The Situation Room weekdays 5-7pm ET on CNN.

BLITZER’S BLOG: Bad blood could impact Republican ticket
January 20th, 2012
01:49 PM ET

BLITZER’S BLOG: Bad blood could impact Republican ticket

By Wolf Blitzer, CNN

(CNN) - And now there are four Republican presidential candidates left in the contest.

They were all on the stage Thursday night at the tough CNN debate in South Carolina.

One of them will almost certainly face President Barack Obama in November. There is still a tiny chance no one will emerge with enough delegates to wrap things up. I suppose, at least theoretically, there could be a brokered convention in Tampa, Florida, at the end of August.

But that is unlikely.

As I watched the four candidates debate Thursday night, I thought about the eventual GOP ticket.

Either Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum or Ron Paul will be the party’s presidential nominee, but I also began to ponder whether one of the four on that stage will be the vice presidential nominee.

If Romney were to get the nod, for example, would he ask one of the other three to be his running mate?

Could there be a Romney-Gingrich, Romney-Santorum or Romney-Paul ticket?

If one of the other three were to get the nomination, would he pick someone on that stage as a running mate?

There is a history of presidential nominees selecting a former rival – even one who said some nasty things in the heat of campaign.

As recently as four years ago, then-nominee Obama asked Joe Biden to be on the Democratic ticket even though Biden had said some tough things about Obama during the campaign.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan asked George H.W. Bush to be his running mate even though Bush had blasted Reagan’s “voodoo economics” during the campaign.

Despite that history, as I watched the debate Thursday, I concluded that there was simply too much bad blood spilled on that stage to make it work this time. Santorum said Gingrich had “no discipline, no ability to pull things together.” Romney slammed Gingrich, saying, “You talk about all the things you did with Ronald Reagan. ... You’re mentioned once in Ronald Reagan’s diary.” And Gingrich piled on Romney, citing examples of companies that suffered under Bain Capital. I think that it would be hard for these candidates to forget those stinging comments.

I could be wrong. Politics can be very strange. But if that were to happen, I have to admit I would be surprised.

Follow Wolf Blitzer on Twitter: @WolfBlitzerCNN

RELATED POST: Five things we learned from Thursday's debate

Post by:
Filed under: 2012 election • Debates • Republicans • Wolf Blitzer
soundoff (128 Responses)
  1. Derail

    I missed it too;I hear from other mudmeis.Cain and Romney came out on top.Cain for being direct and calculated.Romney for being defensive.Sorry this is the best I can do from what I've read.

    April 6, 2012 at 11:32 pm |
  2. Griff

    Also, you cannot colonise the moon, because there is no oxygen up there. If you cause anyking of an explosion on the Moon, from any kind of operatus Oxygen-Tank, or a Power-Station, etc, you cannot even begin what would happen down here if there was anykind of an explosion up there. "

    January 27, 2012 at 1:00 pm |
  3. Griff

    "Bad Blood? What were they doing there, Wolfi Were they guest's or were they spying? Quote: As Tensions Rise, Egypt Bars Exit of Six Americans


    The Obama administration threatened to withhold aid as Egypt confirmed it had kept at least a half-dozen Americans from leaving. unquote.:

    January 27, 2012 at 12:56 pm |
  4. pokie

    Wolf, I hope you don't allow the audience to clap and holler so Newt can't feed off of them...He needs to show his true colors.

    January 25, 2012 at 10:21 pm |
    • Auth

      WHAT he was doing wasn't the problem it was HOW he brags about NOT doing it. I siplmy asked them, So it doesn't bother you that the candidate you support doesn't have enough integrity to just be honest about what he does regarding pork? The bottom line is that we need to stop buying into what the left is doing and saying. They are doing what they always do, try to control the narrative and it is up to us to stop them. They (the left) tried to do the same thing with Reagan. Hell just weeks before the election, Time had all but written Reagan off as unelectable and not able to appeal to the independents. We all know how that went and we have to beat them at their own game again.Reply

      August 1, 2012 at 9:14 am |
  5. gord

    sorry it was the republicans starting with reagan that opened the door to shipping manufaturing to the lowest bidder and replaced them with food stamps-what do you think would happen while the population was growing

    January 24, 2012 at 6:53 pm |
  6. joshua

    Wolf, keeping telling yourself Obama has a chance. And then remind yourself that Jimmy Carter was leading Reagan when Carter was forced to defend his record of governance he lost by a land slide. So, as we watch the 2012 presedential race, we have to note that media attacks are thinly veiled attempts by you and your pals at CNN to help out Obama. I watched Gloria Borger ask the same question over and over and then quickly deny that she was toting the water for Obama. Then, Dana Bash tries a cheap shot on Ron Paul only to be exposed as another media darling. And to top it off, John King makes a fool out of himself in an attempt to take down Newt Gingrich. Just how low will CNN go in their attempt to get Obama re-elected?

    January 23, 2012 at 2:51 pm |
    • Mark

      Oh so THAT's why CNN highlights the drama-queen candidates, instead promoting real democracy and talking about the only two candidates who should even be invited to the debate. Let's hear Paul and Santorum have a slow and intelligent conversation about the differences of ideals in their own campaigns, and discuss cordially over the best way to renew The Great American Dream. Big Business has no business in government, and Gingrich has no business anywhere but retirement. let's see America take the cutting edge again starting with the U.S. Presidency and working across all the Americas, and most importantly let's promote youth voting like never before.

      January 26, 2012 at 4:45 pm |
  7. Dmariewrit

    Blitz, you're a bright guy. so why don't you news persons ever comment when you hear that the country needs a BUSINESSMAN-IN-CHIEF that the GOP SAVIOR Reagan was not a businsessman, as matter of fact, he was an actor. Yes, he became a govenor, but he was an actor all Bible Thumpers should know you don't need practice or experience when God is on your side. OORAH Obama.

    January 22, 2012 at 4:08 pm |
  8. Aaron Urquhart

    Now that the Republican nominee's attention should be in the process of shifting to the Florida campaign and primary, the forecast for the GOP nominee should be much clearer. The important question, at this point, should be not "who will secure the GOP nomination"? but rather, "can the winner of S. Carolina, Newt Gingrich, beat President Obama in the general election"? Why? History tells us that, since at least 1980, the GOP winner of the South Carolina Primary becomes the Republican contender for the office of the President of the United States. People need to shift their attention from the political nonsense of the race for the GOP nominee to the question, "does former House Speaker Gingrich have the momentum, political skill, leadership qualities and campaign strength to beat President Barack Obama for re-election to the Presidency of the United States"?

    January 22, 2012 at 3:12 pm |
  9. Glen

    Obama is looking better all the time. Keep it up republicans. Make each other as look as unprofessional as possible.

    January 22, 2012 at 11:29 am |
    • Aila

      It is pretty gantrse that no one (besides the DNC) has taken a similar shot at Romney. But I think it's kind of early for negative ads to make sense. Even the DNC, IMO, is pissing away money by doing so, since the nomination is still a long way off. For the Republican candidates, it's still a crowded enough race that it makes a lot more sense to toot your own horn than to tear down someone else even if you succeed, you don't know that you'll be the one picking up those votes. For that reason I hope that Paul doesn't actually spend money running this ad, at least not at this point in time (possibly after Iowa it would make sense). Thing is, it may be somewhat personal between him and Gingrich. Gingrich came down to Texas to campaign against Paul's re-election in 1996. I expect Paul hasn't forgotten.Ace makes a good point. It ultimately comes down to what compromise(s) we're willing to accept in a candidate, and especially just how much we're willing to sacrifice for electability.@NanG: Paul wants to rail about hypocrisy, then he needs to address his own.'That's not exactly how it works. If Newt's best defense is that Paul is also imperfect, that's not much of a defense (tu quoque is generally pretty weak, even considered a fallacy). Further, while bringing up Paul's earmark habit is an effective way of trolling his supporters they react badly to any suggestion that Paul is less than perfect it's just not a very damaging accusation to the general public. You could also accuse Paul of flip-flopping on immigration and the death penalty over the course of his career. A long time ago, 1970s I think, he supported the death penalty; now he doesn't. In the 1980s he was pro-illegal-immigration (with caveats); now he isn't. Thing is though, he can give pretty good explanations of why he changed his mind.Newt, of course, can also offer some explanations of his change of positions. It comes down to credibility: do I think that he actually re-thought things, or do I think that he's taking whatever stands he thinks will help him win? And what does that tell me about what he'll do if elected?My dislike of Gingrich is probably almost as intense as Curt's loathing for Paul, so of course I don't believe him. But obviously a lot of people do.Reply

      March 2, 2012 at 4:49 pm |
  10. Doug

    It's a fake election anyway. No real Candidates running,I mean, come on, this bunch is so radical in their beliefs or baggage, how could anybody but the out of work homebodies and retirees who answer these blogs, would really vote for them! The informed few Senators, Congressmen and governors are all preparing for the later part of this year when they will move top the underground facilities being built in Denver, Tooele, Utah, Area 51, Edwards AFB, White Sands, New Mexico and West VA. DO you really think we spent 16 Trillion Dollars on the Wars? Misinformation, Miss-diriection and a totally gullible American Public. And when the moment comes and you think, he was right, well, just like these idiots at CNN, it'll be to late!

    Just take a trip to the New Denver Air Port and walk the grounds as well as the insides, you'll get the picture, and a lot of Questions.

    January 21, 2012 at 3:57 pm |
  11. delgado jose

    Simple question Republican candidates who was the former president, and as I have an America when he was in the White House. If they do not respond properly was another member of the Republican Party that left an America in a critical situation, economic, political, and financial. The Bush Republican left an America bankrupt. The current president is trying to make an America as it was before a free country and respectful

    January 21, 2012 at 6:13 am |
  12. Karl Dick Bush Rove

    American's can't comment on Wolf Blitzer's stories if your outside the country. Seems CNN's prohibits this. Sad.

    January 20, 2012 at 8:46 pm |
  13. skarphace

    Republicans: are you still confused about which candidate you plan to support? Let me make it simple for you.

    If anyone other than Ron Paul is nominated, Independents and moderates like myself will vote for Obama.

    So there it is. Who is it going to be, my fellow Republicans? Ron Paul or 4 more years of Obama? Choose wisely.

    January 20, 2012 at 7:14 pm |
  14. Perk

    "Waiting On The World To Change".....Go Ron Paul For President ! Liberty..."It's Growing."

    January 20, 2012 at 6:51 pm |
  15. Dennis1020

    With this cast of characters, and those who dropped out, it is like the Republican Party pulled the pin on the grenade and threw the pin.

    January 20, 2012 at 6:41 pm |
  16. Mark

    "I think Newt Gingrich should have acknowleged again, that he made mistakes, that he has repented, that he has asked God to firgive him, and seeks to be a better man, even if his 2nd wifes accusations weren't exactly as she portrayed them." Why is this sort of repentance ok with Republicans but when Bill Clinton, years after leaving the White House with nothing really to gain, made a written apology in his memoirs it was called phony. There is no bigger phony than Newt Gingrich and I cannot believe those with what are considered good old fashioned values would buy this guy's hooey. He's a phony people, no matter how good he talks. You wouldn't have accepted this from Bill Clinton.

    January 20, 2012 at 6:24 pm |
  17. Jake Wheeler

    Romney is a corporate stooge, Gingrich will collapse in an ocean of sleaze, Sanatorium just flew over a cuckoo's nest leaving Ron Paul as the people's candidate to rescue us from the corporate dictatorship being foisted on us by the likes of CNN.

    January 20, 2012 at 6:06 pm |
  18. Bill

    Sorry, Wolf. The CNN show may have been tough on the candidates but it was no debate. Just a "Gotcha" session for CNN.

    January 20, 2012 at 5:51 pm |
  19. DC Observer

    John King got taken to the wood shed and deservedly so. King is close to Chris Matthews when it comes to liberal bias -– Fortunately the right is waking up to the liberal media bias --Last time CNN gets to host a GOP debate -

    January 20, 2012 at 5:45 pm |
  20. Griff

    "Buying an d selling for a profit, is business. Romney admits he has problems sometimes on knowing, where and who. But he did add some companies he buit or helped. Plus how it helped growth. Obama has done nothing but brag with no proof, and you?? You Wolfi you get to ask the question of the obama team, and still redfjuse to ask one question :
    Who in main-street, or the private sector employed any of these the democrates keep talking about. WHO!!!! Wolfi?

    January 20, 2012 at 5:39 pm |
    • polly

      As a recently naturilized American - I am actually from the UK - I have been endeavouring to educate myself in order to be an informed voter in November. I have watched every single one of the Republican debates and am scratching my head - am I the only person who notices the total lack of diversity in the audiences and the constant reference to "faith and religion". I spent a lot of time studying for my citizenship and one of the most important things that stuck in my mind when this country was founded was "separation of church and state". It seems as if that is now of little of no importance to the historians and those who talk about the Consitution when they are promoting themselves.

      January 20, 2012 at 6:42 pm |
      • Doha

        Valori Wilson April 20, 2011 How sad to be so vulgar Brandon. First of all, these ainamls have lived with more luxury than 2/3 of the worlds population. They have been loved and respected, warmed on cold nights and given clean healthy food and water. The sad truth is how many children are not given such amazing lives. We give reverence to our ainamls, cry when they are hurt and grateful to them for what they provide us: FOOD!!! The irony to living a vegan life was so cruelty evident to me this morning. My son failed to give water to our chicks. They did what was natural to them, they cannibalized the weakling, drinking its blood and eating it's flesh this is how nature works. Unlike this rabbit, my chick died a slow, painful death, do you think that is better? Nature is cruel humans have the capacity to empathize and love. I am sorry if the photos were shocking to you. Perhaps a visit to a feed lot and slaughter house would help you understand the level of animal respect behind the Urban Farm movement. Now, apologize to everyone, wash your mouth out with soap and behave yourself we forgive you your tirade.

        October 12, 2012 at 11:35 pm |
  21. Howard

    The best opponent for Obama would have been Huntsman. Obama would have had a worthy opponent. Not so much now.

    January 20, 2012 at 5:36 pm |
    • Rich

      I agree, & sad to say but Huntsman is to Inteligent/Pragmatic for todays GOP who seem to be too blood thirsty to be able to win the general election !

      January 20, 2012 at 6:12 pm |
  22. MnTaxpayer

    Most of them are sellouts and opportunists, but none of these candidates could ever accept being number 2.

    January 20, 2012 at 5:16 pm |
    • goo6er

      They are all number-2.

      January 20, 2012 at 5:54 pm |
  23. John Atkins

    I predict Romney will pick Mike Huckabee for his running mate. This is probably why Mike didn't run this time. He will shore up the right flank of the party.

    January 20, 2012 at 5:07 pm |
  24. DENNA

    It is just comical to see the GOP running around like barnyard chickens with their heads cut off. I don't think I have ever seen a less dignified bunch. No wonder there is no clear winner yet. And the best of the bunch, Romney, is actually being overshadowed by the serial cheater, Newt. It is just so sad to see. Obama 2012! :-

    January 20, 2012 at 5:06 pm |
  25. Gordon

    As a constituent of Newt Gingrich's former Congressional district in Georgia, let me say that his politics is one of division. He spewed his way to the top of every political contest not on ideas but on a venomous personality. Each hurdle he morphed into something new to sidestep it with a less than credible story of why he wasn't the same person as before. Changing to Catholicism was a means to an end. Saying he wouldn't indulge in negative politics with other GOP contenders was a means to an end (quickly discarded). His convictions changed with the political wind. What I saw on stage last night in South Carolina was vintage Gingrich. Never accept responsibility; always demolish the enemy and simply be a despicable human being. Elect Newt if you want; but you will have four years of hate and the most divided America since the Civil War. He will say anything to stay in power, and will change his story to meet his needs.

    January 20, 2012 at 5:02 pm |
    • RationalFew

      He sounds like a good tea party pick then>>

      January 20, 2012 at 6:32 pm |
      • Alperen

        I'll bet Mr. .50 cal has no clue who the local Republican Committee person is for his icstrdit.If you just hide for 3 and half years, and have no involvement in a political party, other than a voter's reg card ... then why in the bloody hell do you think your opinion on who should run for nomination will be a factor in choosing candidates?Allowing the state governments to meddle in the nomination process was a big mistake. Contributing party members should just choose a candidate, and let the voters make their decision in November.All parties should be treated like minor parties as far as the .gov is concerned.

        April 7, 2012 at 12:03 am |
  26. Howard

    Yes, but the selected running mate is uaually someone who bowed out at an earlier point. Maybe Michelle Bachmann, Jon Huntsman or Rick Perry could be called, but not anyone who is still competing.

    January 20, 2012 at 5:02 pm |
  27. Leslie

    I am amazed at these GOP candidates, I do not understand how ANYONE could vote for such selfish, dishonest, egoed out, stupid, ridiculous jerks! I wish the republicans would THINK FOR THEMSELVES and vote for the one man who will fight for their rights as human beings, Pres. Barak Obama!

    January 20, 2012 at 5:01 pm |
    • goo6er

      If you hate and despise a person enough (i.e. Obama) you can find a way to overlook any hypocrisy, character flaw, or disingenuity.

      January 20, 2012 at 5:52 pm |
  28. loathstheright

    How about just "BAD CANDIDATES", that would be more true..a serial adulterer, with 84 ethics charges, a Vulture Capitalist who hides money off shore to avoid taxes, a Evangelical Taliban Homophobe Fascist and a old coot with insane ideas....bad blood, yeah, you might say so.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:59 pm |
    • Ned

      Except Romney legally put his money offshore and paid taxes on them first. He didn't do anything wrong there, though people are trying to villify him. It's more of a referendum on Obama's machine that investors put their money somewhere safe until the climate is right to bring it back again. I'd do it too.

      January 20, 2012 at 5:29 pm |
      • ya no

        Ned: I think we all know what that climate would be. It's the one that is changed democracy into a lobbyists bacchanal.

        January 20, 2012 at 5:51 pm |
      • Cheers

        You're in favor of the off shore bank accts. I just read that it cost tax payers about 100 millin dollars. Is it safe to say you support people who don't pay taxes? I have a hard time understanding what's wrong with our banks that these people with a lot of money won't use. Ort what are they trying to avoid is probably the better question.

        January 20, 2012 at 6:15 pm |


    It's funny that all of your predictions start with Romney. So far, he's won a single primary, N.H., and we're now looking as if we have the field set until at least the next two months. None of these guys will drop out until then. The next real battle is between Gingrich and Santorum. They are too near each other's positions. I can see a real situation where Santorum accepts a Ginrich offer of the running mate seat. Santorum will be pissed, but he'll take it, because he knows that he can't beat Obama alone. V.P. would groom him for his own eventual run, and by the way the tie-breaking vote in the Senate.

    Paul will almost certainly run as a third party, Americans Elect, and will poach a TON of votes from liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans. And if Paul can convince Republicans that peace really is ok, then he suddenly looks VERY serious indeed. But Paul won't choose any of these clowns to run with. It would be Rand or another libertarian leaner.

    Of course, all of this starts to make a general election way more favorable for President Obama. He's just doing his job, and this drama allows him time to earn more political points for sewing up Iraq, drawing down Afthanistan, and hope that the jobs picture improves. But after the bloodbath of this GOP primary, the calm, collected President doesn't have much work to do to smear his opponents.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:58 pm |
  30. Gop

    Wolf you be surprised because you know any one of them can beat down your dear leader Obama. if Romney were to team up with Gingrich, Santorum it would be an easy win for them both. I think that is why we will see that happen. Unless Romney picks Marco Rubio. either way Obama is a one term president and that is great news for our country!

    January 20, 2012 at 4:53 pm |
    • Stevethemoderate

      Keep living your fantasy..........
      I agree it's not in the bag for Obama, but your kidding yourself if you think independents like me will vote for, "anybody but Obama". I'm leaning Obama at this point........

      January 20, 2012 at 6:07 pm |
  31. Phil

    I would have voted for Gingrich - but then I heard that he would entertain the idea of Palin. Just lost my potential vote.

    Santorum - not a chance. He's incredibly stupid.
    Romney - not a chance. He's a mormon... Actually - we need more atheists running.
    Paul - need I say more?

    I'm voting for Obama again.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:48 pm |
  32. Kat

    I agree. I just don't see any pairing possible that will satisfy enough, and be workable enough, to beat Obama. It's like they are all still in shock he got elected in the first place and it's lingered almost 4 years.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:47 pm |
  33. Richard, Winston-Salem

    I see a Romney and Christie ticket. Formidable, no? However, it will be no match for Obama and Hillary. And meet your new Secretary of State, Joe Biden.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:45 pm |
    • gallianoparfait

      A superb idea that many are advocating.

      January 20, 2012 at 6:24 pm |
  34. DaveC

    Used to be a die hard Reagan and first Bush republican. Loved them and what they stood for. Respected the way they ran the country and how they carried themselves. Especially loved the way the elder Bush kept Secretary of Defense Cheney in line during the first gulf war. True wartime leader. Not like his hack son.

    Then came the religious conservatives, right wing no tax and spend nuts, tea party "I never met a poor person I didn't despise", etc. republican party. Became an independent voter and voted Clinton and Obama and happy I did.

    If you are an independent voter (forget about the republican sheep, they would vote for a stuffed mouse if it was republican right now they hate Obama so much) how in God's name can you justify voting for any of these guys? How many times has Romney ran for President? I have lost count. The only reason he is the front runner this time is because the rest of the bunch is so weak. How about Santorum? The good people of Pennsylvania threw him out years ago and now he wants to be President. Last night he assailed Gingrich for lobbyist ties but his ties to Abramoff have barely been mentioned. I don't need to even talk about Gingrich. That guy has enough baggage to fill up a train car. Last but not least, Ron Paul. Good old Ron, a reformed libertarian who became a republican because he figured out libertarians don't get elected. You know why they don't get elected? Because their ideas are unrealistic and they stink. Great on paper, lousy in practical application. America is not a testing environment. That is what it would be under a Ron Paul Presidency.

    True, Obama has had his ups and downs. So did Reagan and Clinton. But right now we have Bin Laden dead, we are out of Iraq, we will soon be out of Afghanistan, the economy is on the mend, unemployment is going down and confidence is going up. Guess what, America has not become a socialist country. What a shock.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:44 pm |
    • jim

      An excellent post. Well said.

      January 20, 2012 at 5:34 pm |
    • JJC

      Great points. As an independant myself I have come to a similar conclusion.

      January 20, 2012 at 5:39 pm |
    • Ned

      I'm an independent too, and I have to point out that there is that little matter of trillions of dollars of debt that exceeds our productivity. Now there's a meltdown waiting to happen. . .and Obama seems to be in over his head on how to get out of that, so I have a hard time going with him this time. Romney seems to have the tools, if people can look past his "failing" of being rich, which seems sour grapes to me. Rather a rich man who knows how to manage our money, than someone who would rather spend it.

      January 20, 2012 at 5:40 pm |
      • dd


        The trillions of debt was from the wars, and the emergency infusion the economy needed to make sure our country didn't go to the dogs. Last I know, we aren't a country that is being foreclosed upon tomorrow. We need to let the economy mend and then take care of the debt once it has. If you were up against the wall and had to spend the money you had on food, or repay a debtor that isn't clamoring for repayment, what would you chose?

        Servicing debt at this time will do nothing but shrink the economy. A republican president would have done the same thing, in fact President Bush did.

        January 20, 2012 at 6:26 pm |
      • RationalFew

        That doesn't give him the tools required as a politician. In industry he was the boss. Do what he says or get fired. The government is not run that way. YOu have negotiate and broker deals between the house and senate. Obama does that well.

        January 20, 2012 at 6:38 pm |
      • Ken

        Ned, I think you are echoing a lot of folks out there that didn't attend business school either, and are seriously considering joining the republican ticket on election day this year. Don't! Obama might have disappointed you, you are not alone, but you should really be disappointed that we are having a sharp recession and that the steps that the President took early on were expensive measures targeted at avoiding a much deeper depression. You might have liked a complete financial meltdown, massive job losses, no domestic car production etc, but history will award Obama for taking these expensive, but necessary steps.
        As for Romney, he might sit tighter on the revenue hit gets in after more tax breaks for rich folks that don't need them (I'm one of them by the way), but this will only lead to more job losses... The GOP does not have a silver bullet for our economy either.

        January 20, 2012 at 6:57 pm |
      • Jim

        Obama has not been given a chance. He has been stifled by a GOP that insists on his failure as the main objective. Because Romney had experience in the world of finance doesn't mean he would be a good president. The government isn't in the business of making money. Politicials can't fire citizens to raise the bottom line to improve stock value. Romney is good at making money period. We have to accept the reality that our standard of living is going to be going down hill. Corporations are in the business of making a profits. Cutting costs are part of profit making. Labor costs, weak regulations, and tax breaks in the emerging markets have driven American industries overseas. This is the conservative world. However, there are other ways to do business. Germany is an economic powerhouse and there is corporate nationalism there that we don't have here. Here it's just how much can I make. Mitt is for the status quo in the U.S. Somehow, many have been convinced that the American model is the ideal. The world has changed a lot since WWII. We need to ask: What kind of country do I want?

        January 20, 2012 at 8:21 pm |
    • ya no

      Echo Jim. Excellent post. A 'stuffed mouse'? Would it matter to anyone?

      January 20, 2012 at 5:42 pm |
    • Howard

      Very well put dave!

      January 20, 2012 at 5:55 pm |
    • Cheers

      WOW, great post. I do echo your same ideas. But I have to be honest, you've done a great job at communicating.

      January 20, 2012 at 6:20 pm |
    • RationalFew

      Your story and mine are identical. Great post!

      January 20, 2012 at 6:35 pm |
      • Alokoto

        Max,I agree that Ampad was poorly run and manadaged and arpeaps to have taken on too much debt, to the point they couldn’t pay their bills and were forced into bankadruptcy.A few hunaddred peoadple lost their jobs over 10a0years.a0 Credadiadtors got screwed, but that’s a risk credadiadtors take.a0 If you’re going to run with the big dogs like Bain, you betadter be preadpared to lose your ass from time to time. Yes, shareadholdaders got screwed, but who the hell wasa0buyading stock in a comadpany if it was so poorly leveradaged and manadaged? a0a0But for every failadure like Ampad, there area0many, many, manya0sucadcess stoadries.a0 But no onea0cares about the sucadcess, only about the handadful of failadures wherea0peoadple lost jobs and money. a0a0a0This is a loser for Romadney and if he’s the nomadiadnee, he’ll get crushed on this by Obama.a0 That’s why they want Romadney to win.a0a0a0Parade a guya0all over TVa0who got screwed by Romadney, and it’s all over.a0 The press eats it up.a0 Obama wins.a0 Easadily.a0

        April 5, 2012 at 6:33 am |
  35. ThinkAgain

    "Bad blood"? What else do expect from a bunch of whiny, serial liars who see our country as nothing more than to exploit for the benefit of the rich who want the American taxpayer to fund their global expansion while we rot in the dust?

    January 20, 2012 at 4:40 pm |
  36. polite centrist

    Four more years of President Obama is better than any of them.
    I'm certainly glad Gov. Perry is out of it. He doesn't even believe in evolution!

    January 20, 2012 at 4:40 pm |
  37. David in Ky.

    How soon we forget: John McCain selected a non-Presidential candidate as his running mate in 2008.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:35 pm |
    • Cheers

      John McCain could of had Jesus as his running mate and would of lost. People are tired of the BS. These old time politicians have too much corruption in their back pockets. Look at Newt, serious-he needs to go, Now Mitt with his closing american companies for large profits only to put ithe money n the Cayman Island Banks. How can I respect that? I wsas hoping for a rep candidate of value since I'm indpependant but so far thesee clowns aren't cutting it. ANd since it looks like the country is finally taking a step in the postive direction, without the help of the Rep in congress, my hand will have to go to Obama.

      January 20, 2012 at 6:25 pm |
  38. Debbie

    Too much bad bloodon the stage!!!! What are you talking about!? Newt had every right to be HACKED OFF AT THE OPENING QUESTION! you and your cnn cronies are simps! The CNN cronie asking the question was the the 'bad blood' working for the democratic machine. Also BAD BLOOD is in the White House NOW..A SOCIALIST AND THEN SOME....

    January 20, 2012 at 4:32 pm |
  39. petena

    You forgot about all the bad blood. Gringrich/Wife No.1, Gingrich/Wife No. 2, plus all the other ones that are still in the closet and haven't come out yet.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:32 pm |
  40. LeRoy_Was_Here

    I agree that I can't see Romney picking Gingrich as a running mate, but I DO think it is possible that he might pick Santorum. There hasn't been QUITE as much 'bad blood' between Romney and Santorum. But I still think it is more likely that Romney would choose a running mate outside of these other three remaining candidates. Someone like Mitch Daniels or Chris Christie or Rubio. I have no idea who Gingrich would pick as his running mate, but you can bet it wouldn't be Ron Paul! Gingrich has said he would give Sarah Palin a prominent role in his administration. Oh no! Not her again!!

    January 20, 2012 at 4:31 pm |
  41. Brenda

    When Gingrich turned the question around on John King and said his question was the most "despicable thing he could think of", John should have said, "I think most Americans would consider having an actual affair on your ex-wife for 6 years as despicable – not my question." He left his first wife who had cancer, his next wife who had MS. What makes Americans think he wouldn't just leave the presidency when things got tough, If he lied to his wives you KNOW he will lie to the American people. Personally, I don't want a president whom I can't believe anything that comes out of his mouth. Saying that the question is the most despicable thing he'd ever heard of just shows what Newt's real character is.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:30 pm |
    • Semih

      concerning Ron Paul v. all other candidates. Yet you countnie to deny the facts.And no I was not in any way equating Dr. Paul to George Washington, I was equating their ideas. GW was the original action hero, at 6'4 and 200+ pounds he was larger than life and his exploits and character made him THE epitome of what an American President should aspire to be. As Henry Lee said he was first in War, first in Peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen and in my opinion no other President has or will ever come close to filling Washington's shoes.Reply

      August 2, 2012 at 10:56 pm |
  42. Chandra

    Wolf – . Whatvver they are saying about each other is just euphemism. It could be much worse if the truth is out.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:26 pm |
  43. jparker77

    If Romney is the nominee then he will probably pick 'fatty' Chris Christie to be his Vp. Lately Crusty has been doing alot of campaining & pandering for Romney. Thats my prediction, that & Obama will win another term. Obama 2012.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:26 pm |
  44. kim, dc.ks

    The Republican ego is a savage beast, and I can't imagine any of these guys having the co-operative DNA to take a back seat. The one that scares me most is Gingrich, with his willingness to find a "posistion" for Sarah Palin.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:22 pm |
  45. Maria

    Santorum is a religious zealot, therefore no good either. The bottom line is, Obama rocks!

    January 20, 2012 at 4:21 pm |
  46. Maria

    for Ron Paul, I wish him well on his return trip to Mars or whichever planet he descended from. Romney is the biggest jokester with his 1/4 billion in the Caymans, and wanting to represent "the people" or his "fellow Americans". We all pay his taxes!

    January 20, 2012 at 4:20 pm |
  47. Maria

    The so-called "great communicator" was quite the gentleman as compared to the present field of bozo's seeking the highest office. In the case of Newt he was seeking higher orifice.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:18 pm |
  48. Nobody Cares

    Keep trying, CNN. Mitt will win SC and will NOT run with any of those nutjobs on his ticket. NO way...he has way more sense than that. He certainly won't put Newt nor Ron Paul on that ticket. Santorum? I'm not sure about that one either.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:17 pm |
  49. skarphace

    I believe that the only candidate on that stage who would accept a VP slot would be Santorum. Would any of the other three accept Santorum? This is the question. Paul most certainly would not. Romney would have the most to gain from such since it helps him convince the Christian Conservatives to find the incentive to vote for him. Gingrich would have less to gain, but such is still possible.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:15 pm |
  50. Antonio666

    Neither Gingrich nor Romney would want to be ANYBODY's Vice President. Ron Paul is too cranky and Santorum would be a great liability because he's an idiot. No, a smart GOP candidate would select either Condoleeza Rice or Marco Rubio as running mate. Hopefully, this won't happen or it could be trouble for President Obama. I think whoever the nominee is, he will end up making a major blunder like McCain did in 2008. Michelle Bachmann perhaps. Or maybe Sarah Palin again. Newt has already stated that he would have a place for her in his administration. Sure sign that he has completely lost any common sense he may have had.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:14 pm |
  51. Jon

    Mostly, I just can't see any of these windbags stooping so low as to take the Vice President position. They want it all.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:10 pm |
  52. ART

    Is Florida the next stop for this circus, because all I see is a bunch of clowns.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:09 pm |
  53. scott

    wolf, u are wrong. politics makes for very strange bedfellows and things change....not always, but they do....the one exception is last time around, pres obama didnt ask sec clinton to be his vp, however, she did get a plum assignment in the administration. remember this ole friend had 2 sons, one joined the navy and the other became vp and neither of them were ever heard from again.....

    January 20, 2012 at 4:09 pm |
  54. CTR

    If Romney does not become the next President then America will miss out on the chance of having one of the greatest president. Unfortunately people have the biggest misconception of his LDS religion. And yes, he is christian!

    January 20, 2012 at 4:07 pm |
  55. MMallon

    Idle speculation, Wolf. The Clintons genuinely disliked Barack Obama, but Hillary got in line because she wanted to put party first. These establishment schmucks care more about not rocking the boat than actually taking a stand on anything, as seen with Perry's endorsement of Newt Gingrich. You can tell something about a man or woman's integrity by how willing they are to stick to their convictions even when the cameras aren't rolling. Dr Paul will never endorse any of the three remaining candidates even if one of them defeats him to claim the party's nomination, because he sincerely believes they are wrong in every way someone can be wrong on the issues that matter. But Gingrich, Romney and Santorum only care about advancing their political agenda, which means not rocking the GOP boat.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:06 pm |
  56. Dixie AZ

    One out of the four is enough, Wolf. Surely there are some sane members of the GOP left who can find someone to fill out the ticket.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:05 pm |

    They all lie so who cares?

    January 20, 2012 at 4:04 pm |
  58. Ted

    Wolf –
    Politics is a very rough, tough business. Remember Obama and Hilary Clinton had a bruising campaign struggle that got quite nasty at times, and everyone thought they would be bitter enemies, but eventually Obama helped her with campaign debts and she became secretary of state. These folks are tough pragmatists, but I don't envy what they put themselves through. At times we hold them to a higher standard than we hold ourselves. Who has never said or done anything they later regret?

    January 20, 2012 at 4:04 pm |
  59. mcox

    Wolf, they will all bed each other if it furthers their agenda. Sad but true.

    January 20, 2012 at 4:00 pm |
    • Galela

      I don't think that Perry is electable. I think that Romney would win going away. I think that Romney might have defetaed Bachmann, but I think that Perry will be the Tea Party favorite, and I just can't see Romney defeating him. The following is simply a joke; don't go ballistic on me. Funniest thing I've read regarding Perry is that he's George W Bush without the ethics or intelligence. – Larry W/HBReply

      October 9, 2012 at 7:34 pm |
  60. SoSad

    It appears that the Republican candidates will self destruct, again, against Obama. This has been entertaing for the general public, to witness the fracture, splintered Republican Party. Brought upon by the far right Tea Party. The party member do not want Romney because he is a Morman (anti-christian). Gringrich, because he old school Republican who's the same of Washington establishment. Santorum, he's a light weight ex-senator, holier than thou, racist. Ron Paul, extremist wacko!, not electable. The tea party has redefined the Republican and their is no captain to right the ship. It will be this way for at least the next 10 years, unless they have someone who knows how to comprise!

    January 20, 2012 at 3:58 pm |
  61. EddyL

    How about Romney-Bozo.... that seems like a good balance/

    January 20, 2012 at 3:55 pm |
    • Howard

      Bozo – Romney would make it easier for me to sleep at night.

      January 20, 2012 at 6:01 pm |
  62. nannimoe (sacramento ca)

    IMO, not one of these Republican will give Obama a real run for his money, if this is all they have then it will be Obama for another 4 years

    January 20, 2012 at 3:54 pm |
  63. Jim

    I think Santorum has a good chance of being on the ticket as the number 2. I don't think he can win. He wouldn't be a good fit as number 2 with Gingrich and that's why in last nights debate he went after him pretty hard. Romney is a moderate and will need a bona fide conservative to balance the ticket. Santorum would garner the conservative voters, including social conservatives, that Romney might not otherwise get because of his record as governor and his religious affiliation. Santorum is playing this as a best 2 out of 3 scenario. He or Romney will the nod or Romney wins. The third scenario is a Gingrich win, which would mean Santorum is out as the conservative loser. Santorum, as well as most other people believe Ron Paul is a very long shot.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:54 pm |
  64. Giovanni

    Again, the MSM (you included) forgot to consider Paul. If someone were to take him up as a VP, it would significantly improve their chances to beat Obama come November.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:53 pm |
  65. Ed Sr of Dallas Tx

    Wolf........Bad blood is being caused not only by the candidates between themselves but due to the NEWS MEDIA giving OPINIONS and causing heat. The news media is supposed to REPORT the news and then back off! Nobody is asking the news media for OPINIONS....the voters can form their own opinions. Myself, as a voter, do not care one bit what a news commentator's opinion is UNLESS I ask for it! Please REPORT the news and then back off. I pay for the internet and for my cable TV and I am sure not paying for someone else's political OPINIONS!

    January 20, 2012 at 3:48 pm |
  66. Sal

    All four of them wouldn't be any good for this country as president! 

    January 20, 2012 at 3:48 pm |
  67. tinany

    The bad blood is due to there being two races. One for the GOP nomination and the other for being the Anti-Romney canidate. Only Romney is going for the GOP nomination. Occassionally, Gingrich goes for the GOP nomination and says the other candidate should be vowing for the Anti-Gingrich ticket. However, the left and right media beat him savagely more than anyone, along with Trump and Paul being their enemies. Also, the Anti-Romney candidates are so into holding that fake crown that is nothing but a joke, that they forget about wanting America to follow conservative policies and focus almost exclusively on bloodying each other. Santorum, Paul, Bachmann, Pawlenty, and to Perry and Huntsman to a great extent always viewed as Romney as the frontrunner and enjoyed getting into the trap that the vile establishment set for them – and that is to only focus on each other by splitting the race into two and tricking all these candidates and their ardent supporters into thinking it is a race b/w Anti-Romney and Romney. Actually, why focusing on bloodying each other that resulted in the most disgusting, negative campaigning by all the rivals, they lose focus on Romney. The rival comments are so nasty, that they tend to focus on those rivals making those nasty comments/ads. All the while, Romney does limit attacking of others, acting like these are just dirty idiots annoying him while he pretends to focus on Obama, giving people the impression only he can take on Obama.

    However, Romney's case about Obama is weak, non-persuasive, and lacks passion. The anti-Obama sentiment among the anti-Romney wannabe's is much stronger and closer to the views of the Republican base. However, as establishment and media and their campaign managers have convinced them not to effectively touch Romney and focus on each other as the race is first to be the anti-Romney frontrunner. Campaign managers have convinced their candidates that only once it is soley between Romney and them will they help their candidat win against Romney. Unfortunately, by that time, the race will be over.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:46 pm |
  68. Realist

    The road to hell is paved with republicans.................

    January 20, 2012 at 3:45 pm |
    • Howard

      Its paved BY Republicans.

      January 20, 2012 at 6:02 pm |
  69. Rajiv Shaw

    They have enough bad blood to mess things up for the GOP come November.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:40 pm |
  70. Adam4x4

    I believe Romney's first choice for running mate would be Chris Christie. Whoever it is, they will look like the odd couple. Romney is a lone wolf with a history of making big money at the expense of others. He has no real friends or supporters. He is backed by people who are making a calculated choice that they will profit by aligning themselves with him. He is like a comic strip charcter with no soul. How much loyalty can he garner? Even his sons looked like deer in the headlights on stage with him. It was like they didn't even know him. He's an empty suit.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:39 pm |
  71. Jt_flyer

    These are the very best America has to offer?

    January 20, 2012 at 3:38 pm |
    • Howard

      Its the best that the Republicans have to offer.

      January 20, 2012 at 6:10 pm |
    • Reece

      also gave the illegals amensty, which encouraged others to come. Because he foolishly believed that Democrats would work with Republicans to shut off the flow of illegals into our country after that. We conservatives are finding out that you cannot trust the promise of an elected Democrat. When they promise $10 in spending cuts for $1 in tax increases, we can be sure they will stand by the latter, but not by the former. This is why nearly all conservatives want to see real spending cuts before considering anything else.Reply

      October 10, 2012 at 5:23 pm |
  72. Joe

    Romney will *not* win the nomination. People are waking up to the scam.

    Wait til Texas... Ron Paul will have a clear lead after taking his home state.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:37 pm |
    • Josh

      I was a McCain support in 2000 alugothh he is not the ideal candidate, he is going to get my support for President if he is the candidate. It will still be interesting as Huckabee has a chance to win a number of southern states on Super Tuesday. If he and McCain are the big winners, and Romney falls out will be interesting to see what happens. Personally I like Huckabee and if he does win a number of states on Super Tuesday what will that mean.

      August 3, 2012 at 4:23 am |
  73. Drew

    How in he world could you say after a 3rd primary/caucus that things are "wrapped" up? So everything I have ever leanred, specifically about all states having primaries, that means nothing? Can someone gain momentum, absolutely and it can carry over to Florida...but no one has this deal sealed, and until the rest of the country has a chance to weigh in and vote, no one should be crowned. End of story.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:33 pm |
  74. curious

    It does'nt make a difference which republican candidate wins the nomination. They would all have to follow the republican party's platform while in office. Not one of these candidates can bring peace and cooperation to Washington.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:31 pm |
  75. Rhope

    There is no such thing as a permanent enemy in politics Wolf. I'm sure they will surprise us all with a Romney-Santorum or something like that

    January 20, 2012 at 3:30 pm |

    As much as i like Gingrich, Romney is the only one running that will win. Unless, the four of them now running give the general public reason not to vote for any of them. And, they are doing so.. I made up my mine last year not to vote for the president again, but return to the party i have spent most of my adult life supporting. Now at the rate the four of them left are giving the general public reason not to vote for them, the president will win reelection any way.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:28 pm |
  77. anagram_Kid

    I think there has been just too much vitriol exchanged between them for one to pick another for the VP slot. My prediction is that Marco Rubio will be selected to draw in the Latino vote and it will work out as well as Picking Sarah Palin did to cull the female vote.
    Obama 2012 – Because critical thinking skills matter

    January 20, 2012 at 3:28 pm |
  78. Jamie from Riverside

    None of these guy believes what they say for a second (nor do we).
    Huntsman slammed Romney for months, dropped out this week and then did an ass-kissy endorsement for him.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:22 pm |
  79. David Crosby

    Newt Gingrich is one of the people that we should blame most for the failed economy, bad wars and theocrat's in office..he is poison..he is a Beltway insider, run out of Congress for kiting checks, laundering money, illegal campaign finances, an influence peddler and a womanizer...who needs another Benito Mussolini...

    January 20, 2012 at 3:22 pm |
  80. Jason

    Blitzer's right, but not for the reasons he gives. For over a year, the candidates have been hearing how weak and unimpressive they are as a field. Though they won't admit it, I think all of them intrinsically understand that they will need a lot of help to beat Obama in November. Given this, none of them, if they're smart, will seek VP ticket help from another member of a weak field. Whoever the nominee is, they will aggressively seek out one of the 'superstars' who sat this race out despite desperate pleas to get in. That's the kind of help they need, and more importantly, it's the kind of help I think each one of them knows they need.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:21 pm |

    I fully expect Obama to dump biden . He has been a disgrace, a walking mistake. Can't wait to vet those jokers.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:17 pm |
  82. rock woman

    Why would the eventual nominee pick any of the also-rans when there's an option like Sarah Palin available? Given the inanity of the entire campaign so far, she seems like the most illogical choice, and therefore the likeliest choice.

    January 20, 2012 at 3:16 pm |
  83. guynumber0ne

    if anyone watched the debate they would see that no one said anything negative about Ron Paul

    RON PAUL 2012

    January 20, 2012 at 3:13 pm |
  84. Max


    MITT: Making almost $30,000 monthly as speaking fees is 'NOT' much; Banking his $millions off-shore in Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes at home is the way to go; Betting $10, 000 in a presidential debate (unheard of); Refusing to release his most recent tax returns? Why?; Flip-flopping on ALL the major issues to get votes, and the list goes on and on...

    NEWT: Fornicator and Adulterer; Asking his wife for an open marriage to pursue is greed for sexual promiscuity; Fined $300,000 for ethics violation and kicked out of Congress; Advocating child labor for poor kids; Indicating that blacks should cease getting food stamps when the majority of food stamps recipients are as WHITE as he is; Proving to be a RACIST through his language and demeanor, and the list goes on and on..

    Isn't ALL this really CRAZY? Ain't they really 2 republican NUTS?

    January 20, 2012 at 3:07 pm |
  85. Joee Deere

    Jeff Bush still has a very high probability of being the GOP nominee. Just watch!!! hahaha!

    January 20, 2012 at 2:49 pm |
    • skarphace

      Jeff? I think you mean Jeb.

      January 20, 2012 at 7:11 pm |
      • Nirsa

        I think Huntsman has to be the unrepentant aeodrmte to have a chance. He'd have to hope that rank and file Republicans who don't like the direction the tea party is taking them go out and vote for him in primaries. But Romney is already filling that role so it'll be hard from Huntsman (though Romney is doing more to try to have it both ways).Huntsman would be a good VP candidate, but VP choices don't do much to help (though some like Eagleton in 1972 who McGovern dumped, and Palin in 2008, can hurt a candidate). Romney-Perry could be a strong ticket. Romney-Huntsman would be a strange ticket they're too much alike (but then again, so were Clinton and Gore). Perry at the top of the ticket would be weaker, but he definitely would need someone like Huntsman. If the fight between him and Romney for the nomination gets bitter, Huntsman might be Perry's top choice. I don't think Bachmann, Gingrich or the others really have much of a chance. Though I did like a Politico headline the other day: Bachman Turnover Drives Questions. (Gee, did she say I was just taking care of business you ain't seen nothing yet! )

        March 4, 2012 at 9:46 pm |
  86. Doug Ericson

    Herman Cain tried the same tactic Newt gingrich used last night, and the hits just kept on coming till he had to drop out. I think Newt Gingrich should have acknowleged again, that he made mistakes, that he has repented, that he has asked God to firgive him, and seeks to be a better man, even if his 2nd wifes accusations weren't exactly as she portrayed them. When Herman Cain made his first denial, I wrote that one denial becomes two denials, and then four and so on. The longer Newt is able to stay competitive, the more likely it is that some more skeletons are going to come out of his closet, ( or in Newts case his storage warehouse ). Romney, on the other hand didn't do well either. He looked flappable for most of the evening. He said one thing that surprised me, and that was the line about not having inherited anything from his father. Hmmmmmmm. What? What is going to tell us next, that he grew up eating dog biscuits? Ron paul didn't look sincere joking about being embarrased to make his taxes public, because his income was much lower than the other candidates. Now I wonder what he is hiding too. Santorum maintaned a positive demeanor during the debate despite not saying anything of note. So, everthing is going as the Republicanparty Establish Bosses have planned it. They will not have to suffer a Republican Depression President, but still masy end up with control of both Houses. Doug, Pepperell, MA.

    January 20, 2012 at 2:42 pm |
  87. Boomer in Mo

    Whoever the nominee is, he will do what ever big money tells him to do. The Democrats are the same. Money is power and the U.S. is all about money. We don't worship God, just money, even in churches. Have to have a bigger church. Need a fancier church. We need a gym for our church. Let's get a fleet of buses for our church. It's all about the money. We'd be better off if the economy crashed and everyone was suddenly poor. Then money would not talk and we would return to the worship of God and God alone.

    January 20, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
    • Boost

      #6: An interesting arictle. I knew Perry had covered 97% of the state's budget shortfall using stimulus fund money, but the fact that the state's only net job gains were in the public sector comes as a complete surprise. I assumed it had been a matter of adding a lot of new low-paying service jobs.Reply

      October 9, 2012 at 8:31 pm |
  88. David

    ", I concluded that there was simply way too much bad blood spilled on that stage to make it work this time around. "

    Yes, the debate looked like nothing more than a B*tch fight! None of these candidates is Presidential material. From what they said, I conclude that none of them are professional and are only in this for the money! Its ashamed this is the best we can come up with! So far I am still sticking with Obama! He may not have been the best, but these guys scare the hell out me! I can only imagine what the middle class will be like if anyone of these guys get the Presidency!

    January 20, 2012 at 2:17 pm |
    • Menino

      Dan I agree. Romney making spoiecus claims concerning his own success is just as bad as anyone else trying to lay blame on his shoulders alone. As I said, I'm no friend of Mitt's.

      October 9, 2012 at 11:50 am |

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.