Of the Four Remaining GOP Choices... (1 Viewer)

[radcen]

...I am seriously pained at the direction this is going.

- Paul: Unelectable. Would be a weak leader as his policies are both impractical and unpassable. He'll spend more time spinning his wheels than actually doing anything.

- Santorum: Moron. JMO. No thank you.

- Romney: Wimp. Don't know what the hell I'd get. Can't trust him.

- Gingrich: Oh, God, shoot me now. This is the only case I'd vote for Obama, and it would be an anti-Gingrich vote, not a pro-Obama vote. (I will probably vote Libertarian in any other scenario.)

*sigh* Obama, for the win, I guess. Yay. :neutral:

 

[danarhea]

...I am seriously pained at the direction this is going.

- Paul: Unelectable. Would be a weak leader as his policies are both impractical and unpassable. He'll spend more time spinning his wheels than actually doing anything.

- Santorum: Moron. JMO. No thank you.

- Romney: Wimp. Don't know what the hell I'd get. Can't trust him.

- Gingrich: Oh, God, shoot me now. This is the only case I'd vote for Obama, and it would be an anti-Gingrich vote, not a pro-Obama vote. (I will probably vote Libertarian in any other scenario.)

*sigh* Obama, for the win, I guess. Yay. :neutral:

 

[soccerboy22]

Eh. I am not voting for any of them, but I would rather have a Presdient Romney over the rest plus Obama.

 

[danarhea]

Eh. I am not voting for any of them, but I would rather have a Presdient Romney over the rest plus Obama.

Interesting. I'd rather have a rock as president. :mrgreen:

 

[soccerboy22]

Interesting. I'd rather have a rock as president. :mrgreen:

I mean I am voting for Stephen Colbert since I vote in South Carolina. He would do a better job than everyone else.

 

[Risky Thicket]

I'd say that you are right on target. I don't like any of the above including Obama.

Articles I've read today say that the rank and file Republican is still looking for anybody but Romney. I can agree with that. Most people are understandably not at all happy with Gingrich. The powers that be will not permit Ron Paul to have a fair shake and as such he is indeed unelectable. Santorum is fantasy candidate for the religious right. I read that Mitch Daniels is getting some heavy attention - albeit late - from the GOP power elite.

With Obama doing as poorly as he has done, this election was the GOPs to loose. Out of the entire nation the GOP came up with a gaggle of suckers, dummies and fools, from day one. The nation is begging for leadership that can unify and the GOP forward some of the most divisive, lackluster, hosed up, dipsh*ts we've ever seen. There is no reason for it.

 

[pbrauer]

...I am seriously pained at the direction this is going.

- Paul: Unelectable. Would be a weak leader as his policies are both impractical and unpassable. He'll spend more time spinning his wheels than actually doing anything.

- Santorum: Moron. JMO. No thank you.

- Romney: Wimp. Don't know what the hell I'd get. Can't trust him.

- Gingrich: Oh, God, shoot me now. This is the only case I'd vote for Obama, and it would be an anti-Gingrich vote, not a pro-Obama vote. (I will probably vote Libertarian in any other scenario.)

*sigh* Obama, for the win, I guess. Yay. :neutral:

The Messiah is truly bless with any of those candidates.

One year from today he should be starting his second term. :thumbs:

 

[samsmart]

...I am seriously pained at the direction this is going.

- Paul: Unelectable. Would be a weak leader as his policies are both impractical and unpassable. He'll spend more time spinning his wheels than actually doing anything.

- Santorum: Moron. JMO. No thank you.

- Romney: Wimp. Don't know what the hell I'd get. Can't trust him.

- Gingrich: Oh, God, shoot me now. This is the only case I'd vote for Obama, and it would be an anti-Gingrich vote, not a pro-Obama vote. (I will probably vote Libertarian in any other scenario.)

*sigh* Obama, for the win, I guess. Yay. :neutral:

I'm a single-issue voter. That single issue is civil liberties. The only GOP candidate bringing these issues up is Ron Paul. That's why he's getting my vote in both the primary election and the general election. Even if he has to be a write-in.

 

[Camlon]

It happened because the establishment do not understand their own voters, they wanted an easily controllable, big government "conservative" that would not cut in the military.

So they pushed through Romney, and messed up the election, because conservative voters didn't believe that Romney has changed his view on virtually every single issue, and he is a wimp.

I think the best candidate for conservatives right now is Obama. Obama will probably be forced to cut more, because
1. He will never propose tax increases for anyone else than the rich which will bring very little revenue, so he will need to cut government or let the debt go out of control.
2. He accepts cutting military
3. Under Obama the congress is probably going to be more republican than under for instance Romney. So even if he tries to cut government, he will have a hard time to do anything because Democrats oppose reforming social security, medicaid and medicare.
4. Having Obama as President makes a Republican President more likely in 2016.
5. Neither of the candidates (except Ron Paul and Gingrich slightly) is for smaller government, and both Gingrich and especially Romney are big liars. So they will probably be corrupt. Better wait till the Republican party find a candidate worth voting for.

 

[disneydude]

I'm hoping and praying that Gingrich and the Republicans can do the one thing that I'm not certain that the Democrats can do....and that is take Romney out. The Evangelicals and right-wing just might deliver a late Christmas present to Obama and the Democrats. Go NEWT!!!!!!

 

[Ockham]

I'm hoping and praying that Gingrich and the Republicans can do the one thing that I'm not certain that the Democrats can do....and that is take Romney out. The Evangelicals and right-wing just might deliver a late Christmas present to Obama and the Democrats. Go NEWT!!!!!!

Yeah, Romney's a milquetoast like Obama so I can see why liberals may say that - but it's BS. For Republicans, one simply has to ask, "Who can get more of the independent vote running against Obama." No matter how liberal or how big of a RINO the Republican is the Democrats won't vote for him.

 

[Camlon]

Yeah, Romney's a milquetoast like Obama so I can see why liberals may say that - but it's BS. For Republicans, one simply has to ask, "Who can get more of the independent vote running against Obama." No matter how liberal or how big of a RINO the Republican is the Democrats won't vote for him.

That GOP is electing a moderate by nominating Romney is BS. Romney is no moderate, creating a trade war with China is not moderate, to not cut in military at all is not moderate, and the only way he could be a moderate on national issues, is if he is a big liar.

By electing Romney, it is not a victory for conservative moderates like Jon Huntsman. It is a victory for big government conservatives who wants the US to be the world police. It is a victory for the GOP establishment and big money, because they can force any candidate upon the GOP voters

 

[Ockham]

That GOP is electing a moderate by nominating Romney is BS. Romney is no moderate, creating a trade war with China is not moderate, to not cut in military at all is not moderate, and the only way he could be a moderate on national issues, is if he is a big liar.

By electing Romney, it is not a victory for conservative moderates like Jon Huntsman. It is a victory for big government conservatives who wants the US to be the world police. It is a victory for the GOP establishment and big money, because they can force any candidate upon the GOP voters

You don't understand U.S. politics... first thing is, they lie - all of of them, all the time. Romney is doing anything he can at this stage to get Conservative votes... what he says is irrelevant. If Romney wins the nomination, he'll move back to the center / left position and run against Obama's record, and try to clip some blue dog liberal votes, some independents and hopefully still keep those Conservatives on the anti-Obama vote. Politicians are chameleons - they are everything to everyone depending on the situation. You can only vote for a person based on what they DO, not what they SAY as most everything they say is a lie.

Fact is, America isn't in bad enough shape to elect a real Conservative, but we'll surely get there soon enough.

 

[specklebang]

At this point, it seems almost certain Obusha, sorry, I meant Obama will be re-elected, since the GOP has a weak field and they have slashed each other to ribbons.

Personally, I would like to see Paul as President since it would be an interesting experiment to try the old "liberty" thing. I don't think that's what most Americans want but it sure would be a refreshing change from the endless growth of central government growth.

Romney is the chosen one. He's already a member of the "owners of America" club and he'll take really good care of his fellow billionaires. However, I think the GOP overall is too scary for the peasantry and Obusha will win with a small turnout and a thin margin.

 

[Camlon]

You don't understand U.S. politics... first thing is, they lie - all of of them, all the time.

No, there are differences. To change how you speech to different groups is okay. To outright lie and say you have other beliefs than what you really have is not acceptable.

Romney is doing anything he can at this stage to get Conservative votes... what he says is irrelevant. If Romney wins the nomination, he'll move back to the center / left position and run against Obama's record, and try to clip some blue dog liberal votes, some independents and hopefully still keep those Conservatives on the anti-Obama vote. Politicians are chameleons - they are everything to everyone depending on the situation. You can only vote for a person based on what they DO, not what they SAY as most everything they say is a lie.

The american people have not been harsh enough against political chameleons. It seems like it is worse to stand for an unpopular decision than to flip flop.

And I can tell you that this is more of an American phenomena. I have been involved in Norwegian politics, and they do not lie about what positions they hold. Of course they speak differently to different groups, but I have never seen anyone say for instance that they are for private schools, when they really are against.

America do have politicians that stands for something. You just need to accept that it is impossible to find the perfect candidate and by only accepting perfect candidates then you will just get liars.

Fact is, America isn't in bad enough shape to elect a real Conservative, but we'll surely get there soon enough.

You don't need to be in bad shape to elect a real conservative. Is New Zealand in a bad shape? People down here still love John Key our conservative prime minister who haven't lied about where he came from.

But my point is. Obama is better than Romney for conservatives, and Romney is not a moderate. Because the views he has not flip flopped on, for instance military and foreign policy is not moderate at all.

 

[Catawba]

I will vote for Ron Paul in the Virginia Primary as it is an open primary.

 

[danarhea]

I'd say that you are right on target. I don't like any of the above including Obama.

Articles I've read today say that the rank and file Republican is still looking for anybody but Romney. I can agree with that. Most people are understandably not at all happy with Gingrich. The powers that be will not permit Ron Paul to have a fair shake and as such he is indeed unelectable. Santorum is fantasy candidate for the religious right. I read that Mitch Daniels is getting some heavy attention - albeit late - from the GOP power elite.

With Obama doing as poorly as he has done, this election was the GOPs to loose. Out of the entire nation the GOP came up with a gaggle of suckers, dummies and fools, from day one. The nation is begging for leadership that can unify and the GOP forward some of the most divisive, lackluster, hosed up, dipsh*ts we've ever seen. There is no reason for it.

It brings back to mind the days when Democrats sent up their own creampuffs against Ronald Reagan. Remember Dukakis? LOL.

 

[SheWolf]

...I am seriously pained at the direction this is going.

- Paul: Unelectable. Would be a weak leader as his policies are both impractical and unpassable. He'll spend more time spinning his wheels than actually doing anything.

- Santorum: Moron. JMO. No thank you.

- Romney: Wimp. Don't know what the hell I'd get. Can't trust him.

- Gingrich: Oh, God, shoot me now. This is the only case I'd vote for Obama, and it would be an anti-Gingrich vote, not a pro-Obama vote. (I will probably vote Libertarian in any other scenario.)

*sigh* Obama, for the win, I guess. Yay. :neutral:

I'd probably rank them:

Paul
Gingrich
Romney
Santorum

It's not much of a field though...

 

[Catawba]

It brings back to mind the days when Democrats sent up their own creampuffs against Ronald Reagan. Remember Dukakis? LOL.

And images can be very powerful:

 

[TurtleDude]

good idea Dems-attack Bain

Bain gives more campaign money to Democrats than it does to Republicans - TheHill.com

 

[SheWolf]

And images can be very powerful:

LMAO

What the hell? I don't get the joke, but I still lol'ed.

I see that pic of Romney all the time on TV and in attack ads, but what's going on in the top photo?

 

[SheWolf]

good idea Dems-attack Bain

Bain gives more campaign money to Democrats than it does to Republicans - TheHill.com

You mean Super PACS are attacking Bain. It's ok, it's just big corporate money being used to attacked other corporations for making big money with Romney... :shrug:

 

[Catawba]

LMAO

What the hell? I don't get the joke, but I still lol'ed.

I see that pic of Romney all the time on TV and in attack ads, but what's going on in the top photo?

I was responding to danarhea's post:

It brings back to mind the days when Democrats sent up their own creampuffs against Ronald Reagan. Remember Dukakis? LOL.

The pic is one of Dukakis from a campaign ad when he was running for president.

 

[SheWolf]

I was responding to danarhea's post:



The pic is one of Dukakis from a campaign ad when he was running for president.

I don't remember when he ran for president... but that's a funny self portrait to use in a political campaign. I didn't understand Danarehea's post either. I guess it's just cause of my age. I feel young right now... thanks.

 

[radcen]

IIRC, the Dukakis tank photo wasn't used by him for his campaign, but rather he went on this photo-op outing during his campaign and the photo was so ridiculous that the opposition used it and derided him for it. My memory could be failing, though.