Rupert Murdoch brutally attacks Romney - calls him a "terrible candidate"

[bobloblaw]

He actually wasnt a terrible candidate. He made no serious errors (the 47% remark didnt cost him). In fact Id say he was the best losing candidate since Nixon in 1960. Which is why there is a Romeny push now.

The worst candidate of the past 50 years was probably Gore in 2000. More so than McGovern or Goldwater. Neither the GOP in 64 or Dems in 72 were going to win, so mine as well have a fun campaign with a purity candidate.

Gore by far was the worst.

He lost an election (yeah I know he won the popular vote by 500,000) in a year with no wars or foreign policy debacles, 3.8 % unemployment, 4% GDP growth year over year and a budget surplus of $200 billion dollars.

In a similar yet slightly less advantegous year, GHW Bush won by nearly 8 points over Michael Dukakis (5% unemployment, 4% GDP growth and a $150b deficit).

The period 1996-2000 was one of the strongest in post WW2 history and yet Gore lost. No recession, no war and you lose. 1984-1988 was almost as good and the incumbent party won 426 EVs.

[bobloblaw]

Just a thought.. do you Americans ever feel that allowing Murdoch to become a US citizen was a major mistake?

IMO he needs to be deported to some remote island off the coast of Australia, which is unfortunately impossible with his current status. Still, after Obama has started droning US citizens it might be possible to solve the problem, even if deportation would be more humane.

The irony of you calling yourself Charlotte Hebdo and wanting to supress Murdoch's speech...

[bobloblaw]

Same applies here. No one, not even Jon Huntsman, could beat Hillary Clinton.

John Hunstman couldnt beat anyone