I like Mitt

[Airscrew]

Originally posted by TracerX
I will vote for him.  I was nearly 90% sure I would vote for John McCain late last year, but the more I listened, the more I liked Romney.  I guess I trust an honest businessman more than I do a politician.  I eventually dropped McCain and was divided between the two Governors, Romney and Huckabee.  The fears I have over the economy right now tell me to consider the candidate with the best experience in making businesses work.  Romney is the best pick for me right now; he is a refreshing change over the career politicians.

 I heard the same argument for whatisface, with the big ears...(attack of CRS)...

[john9001]

Originally posted by TracerX
 Romney is the best pick for me right now; he is a refreshing change over the career politicians.

he is a politician , his dad was a politician, they are all  politicians, you can't raise that kind of money to run for office unless you are a  politician.

[68ROX]

Mitt is a slick salesman....

I do not want a slick salesman as my commander-in-chief.

I want a commander-in-chief who's resume includes something better than "I was a governor, and a guy who ran a corporation".

I want a president with nads so big they walk funny, and cheese***** like Putin, Iran's Achmood I'mattentionpotato, and the North Korean fruitcake look at and re-think thier school-yard bully BS.

I also want a president who will not rest until Osama Bin Laden's head is on a pole, or is in so many pieces dental records wont help.

I do NOT want a president who's bank account is so big he doesn't care about the working man.

I want a president who's resume dosen't stress on having coffee with foreign dignataries or less than 2 terms in the senate.

I want a president who isn't going to tax and spend because it's in their blood.

I want a president who is going to continue "The Surge" only until every terrorist is either dead or has left Iraq and Afghanistan.  Then, bring our brave volunteer service folks home with ceremony & honor...and take care of every single one who was wounded..as PROMISED.

I want a president who will take every single illegal and kick them out of the country at the CRIMINAL'S expense, after and only after they have served PRISON time for breaking our laws.  If they come back illegal...the prison time triples.

I want a president who has an agenda to create jobs, eliminate NAFTA, raise the minumum wage,

I want a president who understands the difference between gun control and getting guns out of the hands of repeat felony offenders.

I want a president who realizes that ONE single extremist with a dirty bomb could kill millions in an urban environment....and that could mean you.

We're in a different world than 30 years ago.  

I remember sitting and watching CNN in 1990 and seeing some security expert saying that the next war wouldn't be with a hostile nation, it would be with terrorists.  They were right.

Mitt....you don't make the grade.  Huckabee or Ron Paul either.

Hillary is "Back to the Future" and I don't want to go back in time.

Obama does NOT have the experience.  We're talking the highest office in our nation (DO NOT PLAY THE RACE CARD....RACE does NOT matter anymore, this is 2008, and I hope our country has made some progress!).
If this were 15 years from now, and Obama were a seasoned statesman, he would be DEFINITELY worth looking at, depending on his voting record.

I have no clue who the next president will be.

I just hope they are up to the challenge.

I fear that failure may be some lone nut's assanation plot.

History has shown that that happens.

God bless all candidates, and I hope they all take some security precautions.  I don't see alot of that on tv.




68ROX

[VERTEX]

First of all, Sirloin I like the way you think.

second, how about  "Give a s*** and vote for Mitt."

[zoozoo]

GO ROMNEY W000TTT.....  ROMNEY! ROMNEY! ROMNEY!:aok

[AKIron]

Be interesting to see where Fred's support goes.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

My support for Fred isn't going anywhere. I don't see any of them as worthy of my vote.

I am at this point undecided, but I find myself leaning towards McCain as the lesser of the evils. I have the greatest respect for McCain's military service to this nation, but not a whole lot of respect for his political service. I find myself at odds with him over immigration, and not too willing to forgive him for the "gang of fourteen", among other things. It leads me to believe he will continue to be weak on illegal immigration, as well as weak on judicial  appointments. So I may end up holding my nose and voting for McCain.

[C(Sea)Bass]

I can't say who I support right now, Fred dropped out so im split on McCain and Romney. I guess it depends alot on what the economy does between now and when I vote. If this recession continues I think many people will go for Mitt because like my economics prof said today, "if it continues the way it is, all other issues, including Iraq, will take a back seat" and "Americans usually vote with their wallets in mind".

Mitt did do a great job in Massachusetts as govenor, but as was said before, he flops around like a fish on the beach. With McCain at least we know Iraq will be finished the way it needs to be, and that he would not leave our service men and women there one day longer than nessacary. If he was tougher on Imigration I'd like him more, so for now, it's a toss up.

[Toad]

Go ahead and pay more tax to fix the bridges; they still won't fix the bridges.

Health and Human Services and the Military..... that's where the money goes.

[TracerX]

Toad, thanks for the graphic. It sure puts the issue into perspective. Sure would be nice to not have to service so much debt. Even if servicing debt was only half of the Treasury Dept. budget, we might actually be able to afford even Hillary's Health care plan. It really scares me to think what it would look like with the democrat’s plans for additional social spending.
 

he is a politician , his dad was a politician, they are all politicians, you can't raise that kind of money to run for office unless you are a politician.

 
Sorry, that is not a good argument for being a politician. I agree anyone that runs for President would have to be a politician in some way, but I would argue that Mitt Romney is more along the lines of Perot, Forbes and others in his independence from the establishment than any of the others, even Ron Paul. That was my point; he is NOT someone that has made a career out of politics. In fact, he has made a very successful career doing many other things. I would like to see a smart, educated, principled man in the White House that does not have a lot of political baggage following him around.

68ROX, I feel much like you do, and I admire my home State Senator for his service. He is a Hero in my book. I give him such high marks for his principles that I can overlook all of the policy issues I have with him. However, I feel his window of opportunity has passed, and Mitt Romney is as strong as any of the others on Foreign policy, so I have to go with him because I feel he will be the best for the economy.

[bsdaddict]

Originally posted by AKIron
Be interesting to see where Fred's support goes.

some interesting comments in this thread over at freerepublic.com.

And...in any event...if fear of the Islamo-terrorists forces Republicans to vote for a nanny state, pro-abortion, pro-illegal alien, anti-gun right candidate...then they’ve won the war...we ourselves and our fears will have sowed the seeds of our own destruction.

No kidding. For me what has turned the tide to being in Ron Paul’s favor is the fact that Thompson is out of the race AND we are willing to nominate candidates who are:

* Pro-Abortion (or at least were in recent history)
* Pro-Socialized Healthcare (or at least were in recent history)
* Anti-1st Amendment
* Pro-Amnesty
* Anti-2nd Amendment
* Pro-Nanny-State

In lieu of the Iraq war and foreign policy. Seems to me once we elect a candidate that is for socialized healthcare, and pro-nanny government, we have lost the war at home.

The war at home is more important than the war abroad folks.

what is a foreign victory if we have no more country to be proud of. Win here at home is more important now. Just joined the Paul Camp today. It is the only place I can go after Fred.

I'll say this for Paul ... he is at least putting the notion of radically reduced government back on the table ... including among a lot of young people who may never have thought of it.

[indy007]

Originally posted by AKIron
By faith I assume you mean in the hereafter Sirloin. Which man do you suppose would be more responsible? The man who believes there is a higher authority to which he must eventually answer or the man who believes he is his own authority and when he dies is absolved of all responsibility?

Nice way to frame the question

Here's a better one... Which man do you suppose would be more responsible? The man who believes in civil liberties based on the constitution? Or the man who believes the teachings of a treasure hunter passing on the word of a magically invisible alien from some gold plates nobody has ever actually seen?

[TracerX]

Indy, this is not an anti-mormon thread, and it is pointless to sling that kind of stuff here.  Your argument is not very clear, as there is no evidence that Mitt Romney is anything but a man who believes in civil liberties based on the Constitution.  You don't need to try to sensationalize a political debate with trash like that.  Political discussions are messy enough without the careless muck-rakers.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Arlo
Oh .... wait ... nevermind. (Ala Emily Natilda)

Emily Latella.

[indy007]

Originally posted by TracerX
Indy, this is not an anti-mormon thread, and it is pointless to sling that kind of stuff here.  Your argument is not very clear, as there is no evidence that Mitt Romney is anything but a man who believes in civil liberties based on the Constitution.  You don't need to try to sensationalize a political debate with trash like that.  Political discussions are messy enough without the careless muck-rakers.

I didn't inject religion into it. I simply responded to what was obviously a loaded question that suggested people who don't believe in eternal damnation are irresponsible.

I took the same question somebody else posed, and spun it around to show them how ridiculous it was.

Make sense for you now?