Candidates weakness

[Avatar4321]

From my understanding it's not the same as just pulling the money lost back into your state, this would be the Federal just Government giving the state money.

I got it. When Ron Paul gets Federal earmarks for his district. It's okay. When Romney get's Federal money for his state. It's not.

The video shows Mitt supporting a national HC system like RomneyCare and being Obamacare is pretty much the same thing and Mitt supported Obama's efforts then I see him as no better than the title Mitt holds as king of the flip floppers.

Mitt's been on record since the 2008 advocating that the States, not Federal government deal with health care.

If as a Republican that makes Mitt my guy, then I'd say his weak points are he has video of his flip flops, that his flip flops usually are from him fully supporting Obama's platform. What I'm doing here is nothing compared to what Obama and his team with do with Mitt's record.

Problem for Obama is that if he attempts to do that, Romney can do it back to him 100 fold. Will he try? Im sure. But it will backfire. Much like that Sideshow Bob for Mayor ad.

Most people claim Obama is weak but never want to talk about how Mitt is weak... Mainly because Mitt is weak for support the same positions that make Obama weak, and Mitt is a "republican."

Mitt isnt nearly as weak as Obama is. Obama is just a smoother speaker.

Fact is the Republican party is dying, and I’m happy to see it happen as it no longer servers any purpose outside of being big Government liberal lite.

Rumors of the Republican party's death have been greatly exagerated.

 

[AquaAthena]

Since it is now safe to say we know who will be running in the general election I have question for both the right and the left what do you think will be your candidates biggest weakness in the Presidential election? Just to be clear I said your candidates biggest weakness not the oppositions I think Romney's will be the healthcare law he signed as Governor.

Yes, I feel confident you are correct and one reason is because not enough voters are going to be aware of the differences between Romney's plan and Obama's plan, should it still be viable, in November. Romney describes the differences here:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBKksCSNGfg]Romney: Mass. Health Law Differs From Obama's - YouTube[/ame]

 

[nodoginnafight]

Since it is now safe to say we know who will be running in the general election I have question for both the right and the left what do you think will be your candidates biggest weakness in the Presidential election? Just to be clear I said your candidates biggest weakness not the oppositions I think Romney's will be the healthcare law he signed as Governor.

I don't there's any problem finding people's opinions on what Romney';s weaknesses are or opinions on what Obama's weaknesses are.

I'd like to invite you too start totally PRO thread. What are your candidate's strengths.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Since it is now safe to say we know who will be running in the general election I have question for both the right and the left what do you think will be your candidates biggest weakness in the Presidential election? Just to be clear I said your candidates biggest weakness not the oppositions I think Romney's will be the healthcare law he signed as Governor.

Yes, I feel confident you are correct and one reason is because not enough voters are going to be aware of the differences between Romney's plan and Obama's plan, should it still be viable, in November. Romney describes the differences here:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBKksCSNGfg]Romney: Mass. Health Law Differs From Obama's - YouTube[/ame]

If people can't read a birth certificate - how are they going to try to follow this thin, winding (sometimes disappearing) line between Romney and Obama?

 

[The Rabbi]

For me Paul's weakness is that he has not won the GOP nomination as of yet. Outside of that Paul is old, not a great speaker and does something no politician running does, he talks about shrinking Government... That means a loss of entitlements.

Paul's weakness is he is honest, that he wants to balance the budget and hold laws that want to be passed or that have past up to the constitution to see if they are even legal or within the federal Governments powers. This is a weakness because it's near impossible to win votes by taking a free ride away, however it is also Paul's strength and oddly his support base is growing by the hundreds of thousands while all other politicians are losing supports by the millions to apathy.

The next big disadvantage Paul has is the Media on both sides are against him. Has this country ever seen a Presidential candidate with so this much support so ignored, misrepresented and mistreated? No… Then again, the liberal media fears a true conservative, that is why Mitt was accepted so easily, he is not a conservative.

No.
Pauls' weakness is his insane foreign policy stance that alienates anyone who might support him. That and his supporters, who readily appear to be wookie-suit clad nutjobs.

 

[kwc57]

Your time and earnest effort in this thread.

it's amazing that youre criticizing him for his time and effort and you are putting in similiar time and effort and producing much less substance.

 

[blackhawk]

Since it is now safe to say we know who will be running in the general election I have question for both the right and the left what do you think will be your candidates biggest weakness in the Presidential election? Just to be clear I said your candidates biggest weakness not the oppositions I think Romney's will be the healthcare law he signed as Governor.

I love politics, but I've never felt an allegiance to any party.

I think that presently, the current company that kind of dominates the Republican party has alienated a voter like me somewhat with a very rigid stance in policy.

I think the President's biggest problem is that when the economy crashes, it actually takes awhile for the pain of that to spread to everybody that might be effected by it, and we're coming off 3, almost 4 pretty tough years.

Manufacturing in America went away this past decade and with it a lot of jobs with workers who were within 10 years of retiring and were more prone to having a little less education than what's required of people today.

You add that up and that makes for a depression among those folks, and you look at Detroit and places in Ohio, Pennsylvania and elsewhere and the average guy out there really got bit. Then, after the men get bit, the women lose their jobs last when you think of waitresses and other service-oriented jobs that are populated heavily with women.

It's no mistake that both the Obama and the Romney campaigns over the last 2 weeks have started beating their chests in support of women because 10 million more women voted than men in the last general, and the tough times really bit them last out of all of us in America, which is why their number 1 and 2 issues are jobs and health care.

Those women will decide this election, imho. They aren't especially political people. They don't have extreme positions. They just want to feel like the system is working to make their lives easier.

They only happen to be in the President's corner at the moment because of things like the attacks on Planned Parenthood by deficit hawks and social conservatives.

The President's weakness, still, is the economy. If enough of these women come to believe that Obama's a really handsome man and they really like his personality, but he's just not getting things done, than Mitt Romney can win.

However, Mitt Romney's weakness to this point is his likability among women. Can that be fixed? Of course it can, he needs to pivot and to hammer a singular message that is uplifting and hopeful about the economy and where he wants to take the direction of the country.

Mitt's other weakness is having to constantly modulate himself between trying to win centrists like myself and others while not raising the ire of the large Tea Party block that now seems to run the Republican party.

It's really a fascinating election this time because I think it could very well end up being where a Democrat President pulls out his foreign policy successes to hammer his opponent, the Republican nominee whose only way to win is if he can frame the narrative as one where President Romney doesn't just say pretty things about the economy, President Romney gets results.

You make some valid points.
I'm struggling to come up with the "foreign policy successes" of President Obama that you are referring to. Refresh my mind?

I don't know if it counts as foreign policy but it might be the death of Bin Laden to me that goes under anti terror more than foreign policy.

 

[blackhawk]

Some think that Romney's being Mormon will be a issue at one time I think it might have been but with the war on women, war on the poor, war on this group and that group the left has been pushing going after his being a Mormon would make it very easy for the right to create the left's war on religion and I don't think they will risk that.

 

[JoeB131]

Some think that Romney's being Mormon will be a issue at one time I think it might have been but with the war on women, war on the poor, war on this group and that group the left has been pushing going after his being a Mormon would make it very easy for the right to create the left's war on religion and I don't think they will risk that.

I think the way the MSM will approach the issue will be by pointing out just how weird MOrmon beliefs are... and you have a lot to work with there.

Obama will never bring it up, just like he never had to say, "Sarah Palin sure is stupid."

Of course, Romney has so many other strikes against him, there's just so much to hit him on.

 

[The Rabbi]

Some think that Romney's being Mormon will be a issue at one time I think it might have been but with the war on women, war on the poor, war on this group and that group the left has been pushing going after his being a Mormon would make it very easy for the right to create the left's war on religion and I don't think they will risk that.

I think the way the MSM will approach the issue will be by pointing out just how weird MOrmon beliefs are... and you have a lot to work with there.

Obama will never bring it up, just like he never had to say, "Sarah Palin sure is stupid."

Of course, Romney has so many other strikes against him,A there's just so much to hit him on.

As opposed to Obama, who spent 20 years in a racist anti-semitic church? Or who has screwed up every policy he's touched.

 

[JoeB131]

As opposed to Obama, who spent 20 years in a racist anti-semitic church? Or who has screwed up every policy he's touched.

Yawn, guy. McCain didn't want to touch that bullshit with a ten foot poll, and you know damned well Romney isn't going to.

Incidently, Obama took on the Wright issue pretty head on. He did a few silly things like throw granny under the bus, but at least he addressed it.

Romney squirms whenever someone asks him a question about religion.

 

[SniperFire]

It has now been revealed that Obama eats dogs.

Watch the poll numbers drop.

 

[Seawytch]

Since it is now safe to say we know who will be running in the general election I have question for both the right and the left what do you think will be your candidates biggest weakness in the Presidential election? Just to be clear I said your candidates biggest weakness not the oppositions I think Romney's will be the healthcare law he signed as Governor.

I would disagree on the healthcare thing. The difference is state and federal. States have the right to persue things like that, good or bad, right or wrong. On the federal level, it was unconstitutional. Romney knows the difference. Obama doesn't. I think honest Americans are smart enough to know that state solutions are different from federal solutions.

So if Reversible Mittens "knew" that it was different on a Federal level than on a state level, why did he say he wanted to see his healthcare implemented nationally?

Funny that...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbLTovqG29g&feature=player_embedded"]Mitt Romney says Romneycare should go national (8/5/07)[/ame]

 

[SniperFire]

Since it is now safe to say we know who will be running in the general election I have question for both the right and the left what do you think will be your candidates biggest weakness in the Presidential election? Just to be clear I said your candidates biggest weakness not the oppositions I think Romney's will be the healthcare law he signed as Governor.

I would disagree on the healthcare thing. The difference is state and federal. States have the right to persue things like that, good or bad, right or wrong. On the federal level, it was unconstitutional. Romney knows the difference. Obama doesn't. I think honest Americans are smart enough to know that state solutions are different from federal solutions.

So if Reversible Mittens "knew" that it was different on a Federal level than on a state level, why did he say he wanted to see his healthcare implemented nationally?

Because 'his' system is a STATE program, moron.

 

[Seawytch]

I would disagree on the healthcare thing. The difference is state and federal. States have the right to persue things like that, good or bad, right or wrong. On the federal level, it was unconstitutional. Romney knows the difference. Obama doesn't. I think honest Americans are smart enough to know that state solutions are different from federal solutions.

So if Reversible Mittens "knew" that it was different on a Federal level than on a state level, why did he say he wanted to see his healthcare implemented nationally?

Because 'his' system is a STATE program, moron.

A state program that he said he wanted to see implemented on a national level, douchenozzle.

 

[SniperFire]

So if Reversible Mittens "knew" that it was different on a Federal level than on a state level, why did he say he wanted to see his healthcare implemented nationally?

Because 'his' system is a STATE program, moron.

A state program that he said he wanted to see implemented on a national level, douchenozzle.

No, he didn't say that he wanted to nationalize the Massachusetts program.

He has said that dozens of times now.

Are you Obamites really reduced to nothing more than obfuscation?

 

[Seawytch]

Because 'his' system is a STATE program, moron.

A state program that he said he wanted to see implemented on a national level, douchenozzle.

No, he didn't say that he wanted to nationalize the Massachusetts program.

He has said that dozens of times now.

Are you Obamites really reduced to nothing more than obfuscation?

Except for the times that he did...like here:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbLTovqG29g&feature=player_embedded"]Mitt Romney says Romneycare should go national (8/5/07)[/ame]

Must have been one of those "Etch A Sketch" moments we've heard so much about.

 

[SniperFire]

A state program that he said he wanted to see implemented on a national level, douchenozzle.

No, he didn't say that he wanted to nationalize the Massachusetts program.

He has said that dozens of times now.

Are you Obamites really reduced to nothing more than obfuscation?

Except for the times that he did...like here:

Give me the quote.

 

[Seawytch]

No, he didn't say that he wanted to nationalize the Massachusetts program.

He has said that dozens of times now.

Are you Obamites really reduced to nothing more than obfuscation?

Except for the times that he did...like here:

Give me the quote.

Is there a reason you can't watch the video? It was during a Republican PRESIDENTIAL debate:

MITT ROMNEY: Look, it’s critical to insure more people in this country. It doesn’t make sense to have 45 million people without insurance. It’s not good for them because they don’t get good preventative care and disease management, just as these folks have spoken about. But it’s not good for the rest of the citizens either, because if people aren’t insured, they go to the emergency room for their care when they get very sick. That’s expensive. They don’t have any insurance to cover it. So guess who pays? Everybody else. So it’s not good for the people that aren’t insured. It’s not good for everybody else. [Crosstalk]

We have to have our citizens insured, and we’re not going to do that by tax exemptions, because the people that don’t have insurance aren’t paying taxes. What you have to do is what we did in Massachusetts. Is it perfect? No. But we say, let’s rely on personal responsibility, help people buy their own private insurance, get our citizens insured, not with a government takeover, not with new taxes needed, but instead with a free-market based system that gets all of our citizens in the system. No more free rides. It works.​

But wait, there's more...

You could read Reversible Mittens OWN Op-Ed...

There's a better way. And the lessons we learned in Massachusetts could help Washington find it.​

Mr. President, what's the rush?


And then there was yet another PRESIDENTIAL debate in which Willard touted the mandate:

GIBSON: But Governor Romney's system has mandates in Massachusetts, although you backed away from mandates on a national basis.
ROMNEY: No, no, I like mandates. The mandates work.

FRED THOMPSON: I beg your pardon? I didn't know you were going to admit that. You like mandates.

ROMNEY: Let me -- let me -- oh, absolutely. Let me tell you what kind of mandates I like, Fred, which is this. If it weren't...

THOMPSON: The ones you come up with.

(LAUGHTER)

ROMNEY: Here's my view: If somebody -- if somebody can afford insurance and decides not to buy it, and then they get sick, they ought to pay their own way, as opposed to expect the government to pay their way.

ROMNEY: And that's an American principle. That's a principle of personal responsibility.
​

TRANSCRIPT: ABC News/Facebook/WMUR Republicans Debate

But except for those times...



But why shouldn't Rawmoney support a mandate? It was a Republican idea after all...

 

[SniperFire]

But except for those times...



.

So he didn't say the Federal government should have such a mandate.

See, Romney is a Federalist and believes such issues are to be decided by the States.

Do you need to see some quotes to the dozens of times he has clarified that for those of you whom apparently aren't quite enough to figure it out?