Although Mitt Romney lacks charisma, he's shown incredible fortitude and ruthlessness

[Toro]

You're the one criticizing

- capitalism

Well, I criticize Corporatism, but I doubt you get the subtle difference.

I know the difference between corporatism and capitalism, JoeAmpad. You do not. And you are criticizing capitalism, not corporatism. But you try to make the distinction to rationalize your existence in a political party.

 

[whitehall]

Ruthless Barry Hussein changed his slogan from "hope and change" to "it wasn't my fault". Anybody but Barry.

 

[Toro]

You're the one criticizing

- capitalism

Well, I criticize Corporatism, but I doubt you get the subtle difference.

- Christianity

Again, I belive in what the founders believed in, separation of Church and state.



Proven to be an utter failure. Which is why no one is actually promoting them anymore. It's kind of like saying I'm criticizing Phrenology.




You know, I really wonder how it became a tenat of the GOP that we need to sacrifice American lives and treasure to prop up this socialist state in the middle east. No Health Care for Americans, but we got to prop up socialized Medicine in Israel. Some day, one of you koolaid drinkers is going to have to explain that to me.

- people who are anti-union

Yup. Unions made America.

Oh, and you're an odious bigot.



Outstanding

The only thing odious is that a cult started by pedophiles is calling itself a religion.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And that's why you are an über-RINO.

 

[Zander]

Sallow is right. Romney is very tough and will be very hard to beat. I suggest that we all get used to saying "President Romney"....

Poor Joe the anti-mormon bigot...he's gonna end up in a mental institution!

 

[auditor0007]

But that is the point isn't it ?

Al Gore and John Kerry were not great opponents. I voted for Bush twice (and both cried and threw up afterwards). I really didn't vote for Bush. I voted against his opponents.

And that is the point we have reached. This isn't about who can do a better job. It is more about who won't screw us up further.

I was watching O'Reily last night and he was interviewing Beck. Beck was asking if we are ever going to have leadership that will step forward and describe the price we will need to pay in order to get things back in balance.

Obama wants to raise taxes on the rich. I can go for that. For every dollar he increases taxes....he has to cut four from spending (and that includes social security and medicare). That means that some people are going to have to come out of the system.

If Romney thinks he can grow his way out of this mess....WRONG.

Anyway....the point being that when Romney finally gets the nod, the campaign then becomes about what a super lousy job Obama has done. Who takes his place won't matter.

Seriously, the act of voting brings you to tears and vomiting? I'm hoping you are being figuartive and not literal here, because it would indicate you aren't made of very tough stuff.

I actually vote for Bush, but this was before I became completely disillusioned about how the GOP has become completely in the thrall of big corporations that are raping this country.

Again, the whole theory that Romney supporters have put forward is that the 65% of Republicans who really don't want Romney (even if they can't all agree on an alternative) are going to magically fall in line after he gets the nomination. It just won't happen.

It's already happening. Look at Dick Morris, Laura Ingrahm, Ann Coulter. You think they "like" Mitt ? I don't think so. But they all support him (the last I heard).

It is very clear to me that people will rally around Mitt once the primary is over.

Mitt will not have the full support of the far right. But he will be able to pull a good percentage of independents, and that will make up for it. Going into it, Romney will be down 10 points. That means he needs to make up five to six points. Elections tend to tighten up as they draw to a close, and this will likely be no exception. The thing that could prevent this is if unemployment continues to drop and is under 7.5%. If the economy is showing signs of improvement, then Obama will win easily. However, if unemployment jumps higher, all bets are off. In fact, that would likely be Obama's downfall.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

He's going to be battered and wounded after the RNC..but Democrats should not take this cat lightly. He's tough. And he has some qualities that are sure to make the general a real piss and vinegar fight. He's got no moral center on anything which will make it easy for him to transition into a moderate in the general. He's also very clever and ruthless. He has no trouble saying anything about anything, and cites "situational ethics".

And what he lacks in charm and charisma..he will be made up with his money and political machine. The guy has a great ground game and has overwhelmed everyone of his opponents with it.

I seriously hope Democrats are paying attention. This guy has a real good shot at winning.

The problem with Romney is that he is not genuine. People don't trust him because he comes off as fake and that's because he is.

 

[GHook93]

You don't even know what Charisma is! He is very charismatic. There is only ONE reason he is not running away with the GOP nomination. Romneycare! If Obama never forced Obaminationcare on America, then Romneycare wouldn't be spotlined and Romney would have already secured the nomination!

However, Obaminationcare it's drunk uncle Romneycare are highly unpopular amongst smart Americans! However, he somehow has gotten over this handicap and it's a BIG hurdle to jump over!

He is very charismatic and he is going to make a Great President. One of the books! I am going to help in his pursuit next Tuesday during the IL primary!

He's going to be battered and wounded after the RNC..but Democrats should not take this cat lightly. He's tough. And he has some qualities that are sure to make the general a real piss and vinegar fight. He's got no moral center on anything which will make it easy for him to transition into a moderate in the general. He's also very clever and ruthless. He has no trouble saying anything about anything, and cites "situational ethics".

And what he lacks in charm and charisma..he will be made up with his money and political machine. The guy has a great ground game and has overwhelmed everyone of his opponents with it.

I seriously hope Democrats are paying attention. This guy has a real good shot at winning.

 

[Full-Auto]

Sallow is right. Romney is very tough and will be very hard to beat. I suggest that we all get used to saying "President Romney"....

Poor Joe the anti-mormon bigot...he's gonna end up in a mental institution!

Very good Sir! Reps your way when the system allows reload.

 

[bripat9643]

Reading through this circle jerk is really more than my stomach can stand.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I don't find it surprising that the media left would be all to happy to bring up the "race" card, should any attack against Pesident Obama begin to take fruit. The left is great at manipulating the topics into something it's not, in hopes to gain some sort of "simpathy" sob story concern for the candidate under attack or the political policy they hope to pass (Washington's own Mrs. Fluke).

They will try to paint Romney as the rich man without concern for the economy or getting people back to work, yet wealth was perfectly ok when Kerry married into it. Obama is another candidate that has been successful at generating wealth through book publishings as well as through various campaign speeches (like Clinton). This President has never refused a campaign contribution regardless if any public srutiny may be found behind receiving it. Mention ethics and politics and you are always certain to get a good laugh.

This is the left's opportunity to SPIN past the issues in hopes the voters will find something else to be of greater importantance than the more relevent issues the nation faces. Let's just see if the media left and Obama can manage to maintain on topic when it comes to the issues, or if they will coward behind cloak and dagger tactics to avoid them. Are we ready to see how long the left is capable of refraining from using the race card when backed to a corner (2 months, 1 month, perhaps only a week)? Any takers on how long they can hold out?

That's the point though. Romney made a lot of money screwing over working people.

That's why he's sure fire loser in November.

We just got through with the worst recession in our lifetime. Made because jokers like Romney ran roughshod over the middle class. Romney's not an opponent, he's a villian from central casting.

When Obama chose unemployment extensions over the Keystone pipeline soly to appease environmentalists, he screwed over a lot of people desperately looking for work. Investing in failed green policies that never take off in the consumer market (like the chevy volt) is the result of a President who places ideology over the possibility of looking to provide Americans with real job creation and long term job growth. Policies that bail-out those in forclosure instead of providing them with jobs to pay off their own loans, is yet another reason why Obama doesn't have a clue how to fix this economy so that people don't have to "settle" with being underemployed.

 

[freedombecki]

He's going to be battered and wounded after the RNC..but Democrats should not take this cat lightly. He's tough. And he has some qualities that are sure to make the general a real piss and vinegar fight. He's got no moral center on anything which will make it easy for him to transition into a moderate in the general. He's also very clever and ruthless. He has no trouble saying anything about anything, and cites "situational ethics".

And what he lacks in charm and charisma..he will be made up with his money and political machine. The guy has a great ground game and has overwhelmed everyone of his opponents with it.

I seriously hope Democrats are paying attention. This guy has a real good shot at winning.

No moral center? Ruthless?

1) You had a bad dream last night

2) Someone supersized your kewlade this morning

3) Your bar tab last night was twice what it has been for the last couple of months, and you can't remember anything.

4) Indigestion?
​

Can we help?

ruth·less/ˈro͞oTHləs/
Adjective:
Having or showing no pity or compassion for others: "a ruthless manipulator".
Synonyms:
merciless - pitiless - cruel - unmerciful - remorseless

In a former life, Romney used other people's money to buy up viable companies, parse out their assets and dump their employees, many who had been working at these companies for decades.

In what world..is that not Ruthlessness?

And..as governor, Romney actually spoke up for gay people and worked with Democrats to come up with viable plan for Massachuettes. He then went on to write OpEds and make the rounds on the tv circuit...telling President Obama that Romneycare would be a good template for national health care.

Now as a Presidential candidate he wants to repeal health care and says he's against gay marriage.

How does that show a moral center?

If you do not correct a bad business, it will go ahead and go bankrupt. Then nobody has a job.

You're angry at the wrong people, Mr. Sallow. The people who owned the business earlier were most likely cutting their losses and passing their infliction of bad management onto the buyer.

They taught people they could do nothing and get away with a big pay check. That's why the business was failing.

A good manager gives people a warning, and if it is not heeded dismisses them. Slovenly managers hope nobody will notice, but the bottom line is red, so investors do notice and take their investment elsewhere.

If the workers are so invested in doing things the "old way" they can't learn productive work habits, it's not the new buyer's fault. Often the new owner is confronted with yet more demands for less output. He meets that failure to cooperate with layoffs.

I didn't make the rules, Mr. Sallow, but I know them. A worker has to benefit the company in a manner in which his or her performance makes the business prosper. If he is not willing to do that, the best thing a good manager can do is see to it the person is routed elsewhere by letting him go someplace that will cater to his or her demands, and not let those engaged in being deadweights destroy a potential good business.

It doesn't matter if you have worked for 15 years for the same company. If you work in a manner that proves profitless and makes the business undesirable for investors, you should clean your locker out before someone else does with a pink slip.

As I said, I didn't make the rules of business up, and it's not my fault if some people haven't grown up to realize that.

Another thing that doesn't work is a government that destroys profitable businesses by making profitless businesses the ward of the state. That eventually puts the onus on fewer and fewer profitable businesses to ante up payments to make their competition eat their bread.

The next step is to give societal benefits to the same old people who lost money before, creating a take away class.

That happened in England, so much so, they refused to hear governmental needs of their pwned colonies who said "we can do better than this for ourselves." And we did.

Those of us who understand this are not willing to take a dive under a system that is headed for another monarchy rule in this land.

In fact, we even refuse the kewlade the present administration is passing. It's like Nancy Pelosi said "don't look, just pass (the koolade bill)!"

Nope!!! Ain't gonna support that, because that is not why my Dad bore painful shrapnel in his body for 45 years following Korea and WWII before he died at the age of 75.

He worked hard and did well as a teacher/coach/administrator when he got out of the service. He taught his own children to work hard and paddle our own canoes.

Obama is teaching another generation to take what somebody else has and use it on yourself.

That's what the gentry do, dear. It's so not American to promote dependency on the fed, imho. I won't do it, and I won't support even the thought of it in the name of all that's fair.

Because it isn't fair. Instead of having hard workers on your hands, you are going to have dependents on your hands, and forever, too. I actually know people who hurt themselves so they can collect unemployment. Talk about stupid. Doh! They wouldn't do it if you took away the option. Instead, they'd grow up and produce a living for themselves and their own families.

 

[JoeB131]

Sallow is right. Romney is very tough and will be very hard to beat. I suggest that we all get used to saying "President Romney"....

Poor Joe the anti-mormon bigot...he's gonna end up in a mental institution!

]

Any shitstain Mormons who ever showed up at my door will have the worst day of their lives...

Romney wasn't able to beat Ted The Drunk. He ran screaming like a little girl away from Devall Patrick. Mike Huckabee beat him like a drum. McCain made him into his bitch. And now he's struggling with Santorum...

Oh, wait. He did beat Shannon O'Brien... an non-entity. Yup.

 

[JoeB131]

You're the one criticizing

- capitalism

Well, I criticize Corporatism, but I doubt you get the subtle difference.

I know the difference between corporatism and capitalism, JoeAmpad. You do not. And you are criticizing capitalism, not corporatism. But you try to make the distinction to rationalize your existence in a political party.

Guy, you work under the assumption the GOP is doing me a favor. I do them a favor when I vote for and work for their candidates.

And when a candidate is so noxious I can't support him, he loses. Every time.

 

[Zander]

More bad news for the whining bigot JoeB131....

The contests in Kansas and Wyoming left Romney with 453 delegates in the AP's count, more than all his rivals combined. Santorum had 217, while Gingrich had 107 and Paul had 47

 

[JoeB131]

More bad news for the whining bigot JoeB131....

The contests in Kansas and Wyoming left Romney with 453 delegates in the AP's count, more than all his rivals combined. Santorum had 217, while Gingrich had 107 and Paul had 47

More bad news for Mormon-kisser Zander.

Romney lost Kansas. Badly.

Let's look at Kansas in 2008 vs. 2012. Romney got 6250 votes. Which is really pathetic. Huckabee got 11,600 there when the race had been effectively called over.

That's how pathetic your boy is...
So sad, too bad, he's gonna lose, and I'll be laughing at your ass.

 

[Zander]

Poor Joe. He's afraid of Mormons....

 

[Sallow]

No moral center? Ruthless?

1) You had a bad dream last night

2) Someone supersized your kewlade this morning

3) Your bar tab last night was twice what it has been for the last couple of months, and you can't remember anything.

4) Indigestion?
​

Can we help?

ruth·less/ˈro͞oTHləs/
Adjective:
Having or showing no pity or compassion for others: "a ruthless manipulator".
Synonyms:
merciless - pitiless - cruel - unmerciful - remorseless

In a former life, Romney used other people's money to buy up viable companies, parse out their assets and dump their employees, many who had been working at these companies for decades.

In what world..is that not Ruthlessness?

And..as governor, Romney actually spoke up for gay people and worked with Democrats to come up with viable plan for Massachuettes. He then went on to write OpEds and make the rounds on the tv circuit...telling President Obama that Romneycare would be a good template for national health care.

Now as a Presidential candidate he wants to repeal health care and says he's against gay marriage.

How does that show a moral center?

If you do not correct a bad business, it will go ahead and go bankrupt. Then nobody has a job.

You're angry at the wrong people, Mr. Sallow. The people who owned the business earlier were most likely cutting their losses and passing their infliction of bad management onto the buyer.

They taught people they could do nothing and get away with a big pay check. That's why the business was failing.

A good manager gives people a warning, and if it is not heeded dismisses them. Slovenly managers hope nobody will notice, but the bottom line is red, so investors do notice and take their investment elsewhere.

If the workers are so invested in doing things the "old way" they can't learn productive work habits, it's not the new buyer's fault. Often the new owner is confronted with yet more demands for less output. He meets that failure to cooperate with layoffs.

I didn't make the rules, Mr. Sallow, but I know them. A worker has to benefit the company in a manner in which his or her performance makes the business prosper. If he is not willing to do that, the best thing a good manager can do is see to it the person is routed elsewhere by letting him go someplace that will cater to his or her demands, and not let those engaged in being deadweights destroy a potential good business.

It doesn't matter if you have worked for 15 years for the same company. If you work in a manner that proves profitless and makes the business undesirable for investors, you should clean your locker out before someone else does with a pink slip.

As I said, I didn't make the rules of business up, and it's not my fault if some people haven't grown up to realize that.

Another thing that doesn't work is a government that destroys profitable businesses by making profitless businesses the ward of the state. That eventually puts the onus on fewer and fewer profitable businesses to ante up payments to make their competition eat their bread.

The next step is to give societal benefits to the same old people who lost money before, creating a take away class.

That happened in England, so much so, they refused to hear governmental needs of their pwned colonies who said "we can do better than this for ourselves." And we did.

Those of us who understand this are not willing to take a dive under a system that is headed for another monarchy rule in this land.

In fact, we even refuse the kewlade the present administration is passing. It's like Nancy Pelosi said "don't look, just pass (the koolade bill)!"

Nope!!! Ain't gonna support that, because that is not why my Dad bore painful shrapnel in his body for 45 years following Korea and WWII before he died at the age of 75.

He worked hard and did well as a teacher/coach/administrator when he got out of the service. He taught his own children to work hard and paddle our own canoes.

Obama is teaching another generation to take what somebody else has and use it on yourself.

That's what the gentry do, dear. It's so not American to promote dependency on the fed, imho. I won't do it, and I won't support even the thought of it in the name of all that's fair.

Because it isn't fair. Instead of having hard workers on your hands, you are going to have dependents on your hands, and forever, too. I actually know people who hurt themselves so they can collect unemployment. Talk about stupid. Doh! They wouldn't do it if you took away the option. Instead, they'd grow up and produce a living for themselves and their own families.

You've taken alot of keystrokes to provide a very sincere answer that is none the less in the "that's not what happened" folder of history.

I've worked in the financial industry for 15 years.

I get it.

Rent a copy of "Wall Street". It will do you some good.

 

[Toro]

nm

 

[JoeB131]

Which has what to do with you being an anti-capitalist, atheist, anti-Israel, class-warfare mongering über-RINO?

None of those issues matter to people.

There's not a single guy worried about his job whose out there thinking, "Man, My family might be starving, but I sure hope Israel's gonna be okay!"

 

[Toro]

Which has what to do with you being an anti-capitalist, atheist, anti-Israel, class-warfare mongering über-RINO?

None of those issues matter to people.

There's not a single guy worried about his job whose out there thinking, "Man, My family might be starving, but I sure hope Israel's gonna be okay!"

An anti-capitalist, atheist, anti-Israel class-warfare mongering candidate isn't at the top of anyone's list for President, JoeAmpad.