Gary Johnson makes the GOP nervous..

[Dreamy]

In my opinion Obama was partly elected in 2008 because McCain was the GOP nominee.

As far as for candidates like Gary Johnson his candidacy is proof positive that the media determines these campaigns and who will get the spotlight.

VP nominee Ryan makes Romney more palatable to many conservatives. His choice allows the lever pull at the ballot box not to stink so much, right?

I don't mind that people vote for Romney but seeing those who once trashed Romney line up and behave as good foot soldiers is a sad reflection of how low the political process sinks.

I want things to change and I truly believe that change starts with each individual voting honestly. That is what I will do Nov. 6th.

I was not a Romney supporter. But he won the nomination and he is running (as a convert, perhaps, to conservatism) now as the standard bearer AGAINST the guy who is fucking things up royally.

Hell, as against the incumbent, I would even vote for Ron Paul. <<gulp>>

Hi Liability.

I get the sentiment and reasoning for voting for Romney. I used to think the same way. I want Obama to lose but I refuse to vote for a candidate who is in the tank for the very things so many of us bitch about every year and every election year especially. I despise the left mentality because they vote for the letter next to the name no matter who is there. Why should I believe it stinks any less if that letter is an R.

I voted for Bush and what did I get? A man who forgot where he put his veto pen. He was very extravagant in domestic spending and far too tolerant of the excesses we saw yet again in Congress.

The parties own far too many people and the votes that they hold.

My vote does not matter so not to worry because Obama is almost without a doubt going to carry my state of Mass no matter which candidate gets my vote. Gary Johnson is my choice and that is voting with honesty. If your vote offered to Romney is an honest one for you then you have nothing to worry about Liability.

 

[kaz]

We know what Romney will do just as surely as we know what Obama will do. You're kidding yourself.

Actually we don't know what Romney will do.

You can say the same for Obama then. They both have a record. Why are you believing empty campaign promises from either of them?

Here are two words you should look up because you clearly don't know what they mean.

1) Republic

2) Federalism

Romney was governor of a liberal State. Whether his positions as President are consistent or not, and they are not, he has shown he understands the structure of the government in our country. So no, we don't know what he will do.

 

[dblack]

Actually we don't know what Romney will do.

You can say the same for Obama then. They both have a record. Why are you believing empty campaign promises from either of them?

Here are two words you should look up because you clearly don't know what they mean.

1) Republic

2) Federalism

Romney was governor of a liberal State. Whether his positions as President are consistent or not, and they are not, he has shown he understands the structure of the government in our country. So no, we don't know what he will do.

Right.

You, know, I almost hope he wins at this point. He'll be horrible for the country, but there's at least a chance the suckers will wake up. Er... ok, a small chance, but it's something I guess.

If he does win, are you going to be around here making excuses for why he doesn't get rid of Obamacare?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You can say the same for Obama then. They both have a record. Why are you believing empty campaign promises from either of them?

Here are two words you should look up because you clearly don't know what they mean.

1) Republic

2) Federalism

Romney was governor of a liberal State. Whether his positions as President are consistent or not, and they are not, he has shown he understands the structure of the government in our country. So no, we don't know what he will do.

Right.

You, know, I almost hope he wins at this point. He'll be horrible for the country, but there's at least a chance the suckers will wake up. Er... ok, a small chance, but it's something I guess.

If he does win, are you going to be around here making excuses for why he doesn't get rid of Obamacare?

Nobody will wake up. The only reason to look forward to a potential Romney Presidency is to simply laugh at the people who said he was so much better than Obama when spending continues to rise. There's no reason to believe they won't defend him, however.

 

[Dreamy]

You can say the same for Obama then. They both have a record. Why are you believing empty campaign promises from either of them?

Here are two words you should look up because you clearly don't know what they mean.

1) Republic

2) Federalism

Romney was governor of a liberal State. Whether his positions as President are consistent or not, and they are not, he has shown he understands the structure of the government in our country. So no, we don't know what he will do.

Right.

You, know, I almost hope he wins at this point. He'll be horrible for the country, but there's at least a chance the suckers will wake up. Er... ok, a small chance, but it's something I guess.

If he does win, are you going to be around here making excuses for why he doesn't get rid of Obamacare?

I don't think he will be as bad as you might think or as good as others might hope.

Romney vetoed over 800 times. The Legislature of Ds overrode almost all. He was suppose to reorganize our transportation agencies...nothing on his watch.

He was suppose to reform the pension system and expand the charter schools,,,nothing on his watch.

Romney did close a budget gap but Finneran in the House was the boss on Mass. state finances.

The Mass, healthcare bill later known as "Romneycare" was signed into law by him but it was Speaker Sal DiMasi who was the leader on it. I think he did it for political reasons mainly.His aspirations for the Presidential run.

 

[PredFan]

We know what Romney will do just as surely as we know what Obama will do. You're kidding yourself.

Not at all, you only tell yourself that so you don't have to evaluate your stance. I understand.

I'm just looking at the flawed logic in your post. You are looking at Obama's record and using it to predict what he will do. Yet you're ignoring Romney's record and, instead, choosing to trust what he says he'll do. I see no reason to trust either one of them.

Mitt Romney hasn't been POTUS yet. Obama has. No flawed logic there, unless you have some new definition of "logic" that I hadn't previously been aware of.

 

[PredFan]

In my opinion Obama was partly elected in 2008 because McCain was the GOP nominee.

As far as for candidates like Gary Johnson his candidacy is proof positive that the media determines these campaigns and who will get the spotlight.

VP nominee Ryan makes Romney more palatable to many conservatives. His choice allows the lever pull at the ballot box not to stink so much, right?

I don't mind that people vote for Romney but seeing those who once trashed Romney line up and behave as good foot soldiers is a sad reflection of how low the political process sinks.

I want things to change and I truly believe that change starts with each individual voting honestly. That is what I will do Nov. 6th.

I was not a Romney supporter. But he won the nomination and he is running (as a convert, perhaps, to conservatism) now as the standard bearer AGAINST the guy who is fucking things up royally.

Hell, as against the incumbent, I would even vote for Ron Paul. <<gulp>>

This right here^^^^

 

[PredFan]

Actually we don't know what Romney will do.

You can say the same for Obama then. They both have a record. Why are you believing empty campaign promises from either of them?

Here are two words you should look up because you clearly don't know what they mean.

1) Republic

2) Federalism

Romney was governor of a liberal State. Whether his positions as President are consistent or not, and they are not, he has shown he understands the structure of the government in our country. So no, we don't know what he will do.

And this^^^^.

 

[Synthaholic]

In my opinion Obama was partly elected in 2008 because McCain was the GOP nominee.

As far as for candidates like Gary Johnson his candidacy is proof positive that the media determines these campaigns and who will get the spotlight.

VP nominee Ryan makes Romney more palatable to many conservatives. His choice allows the lever pull at the ballot box not to stink so much, right?

I don't mind that people vote for Romney but seeing those who once trashed Romney line up and behave as good foot soldiers is a sad reflection of how low the political process sinks.

I want things to change and I truly believe that change starts with each individual voting honestly. That is what I will do Nov. 6th.

I was not a Romney supporter. But he won the nomination and he is running (as a convert, perhaps, to conservatism) now as the standard bearer AGAINST the guy who is fucking things up royally.

Hell, as against the incumbent, I would even vote for Ron Paul. <<gulp>>

Scott Brown is getting his ass kicked by Pocahontas!

 

[PredFan]

You can say the same for Obama then. They both have a record. Why are you believing empty campaign promises from either of them?

Here are two words you should look up because you clearly don't know what they mean.

1) Republic

2) Federalism

Romney was governor of a liberal State. Whether his positions as President are consistent or not, and they are not, he has shown he understands the structure of the government in our country. So no, we don't know what he will do.

Right.

You, know, I almost hope he wins at this point. He'll be horrible for the country, but there's at least a chance the suckers will wake up. Er... ok, a small chance, but it's something I guess.

If he does win, are you going to be around here making excuses for why he doesn't get rid of Obamacare?

If he wins, I dare you to find where I make an excuse for it. I have never had confidence that he would, but go ahead and continue to fool yourself.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Not at all, you only tell yourself that so you don't have to evaluate your stance. I understand.

I'm just looking at the flawed logic in your post. You are looking at Obama's record and using it to predict what he will do. Yet you're ignoring Romney's record and, instead, choosing to trust what he says he'll do. I see no reason to trust either one of them.

Mitt Romney hasn't been POTUS yet. Obama has. No flawed logic there, unless you have some new definition of "logic" that I hadn't previously been aware of.

So we can't look at Romney's record as Governor?

 

[PredFan]

Here are two words you should look up because you clearly don't know what they mean.

1) Republic

2) Federalism

Romney was governor of a liberal State. Whether his positions as President are consistent or not, and they are not, he has shown he understands the structure of the government in our country. So no, we don't know what he will do.

Right.

You, know, I almost hope he wins at this point. He'll be horrible for the country, but there's at least a chance the suckers will wake up. Er... ok, a small chance, but it's something I guess.

If he does win, are you going to be around here making excuses for why he doesn't get rid of Obamacare?

Nobody will wake up. The only reason to look forward to a potential Romney Presidency is to simply laugh at the people who said he was so much better than Obama when spending continues to rise. There's no reason to believe they won't defend him, however.

And you. You guys have enough straw soldiers built now to take over a 3rd world country. Very few people here will say that Romney is "so much better" than Obama. but hey, you guys will have to tell yourselves that to keep going day after day I guess.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Right.

You, know, I almost hope he wins at this point. He'll be horrible for the country, but there's at least a chance the suckers will wake up. Er... ok, a small chance, but it's something I guess.

If he does win, are you going to be around here making excuses for why he doesn't get rid of Obamacare?

Nobody will wake up. The only reason to look forward to a potential Romney Presidency is to simply laugh at the people who said he was so much better than Obama when spending continues to rise. There's no reason to believe they won't defend him, however.

And you. You guys have enough straw soldiers built now to take over a 3rd world country. Very few people here will say that Romney is "so much better" than Obama. but hey, you guys will have to tell yourselves that to keep going day after day I guess.

Get real. There are people on this board who actually think Romney will balance the budget. People who actually think he's going to repeal Obamacare, despite him now saying he's not going to do that. If you think it's a strawman argument to point out that the Republicans on here are trying to paint Romney as a serious and good alternative to Obama then you're not paying attention.

 

[Dreamy]

In my opinion Obama was partly elected in 2008 because McCain was the GOP nominee.

As far as for candidates like Gary Johnson his candidacy is proof positive that the media determines these campaigns and who will get the spotlight.

VP nominee Ryan makes Romney more palatable to many conservatives. His choice allows the lever pull at the ballot box not to stink so much, right?

I don't mind that people vote for Romney but seeing those who once trashed Romney line up and behave as good foot soldiers is a sad reflection of how low the political process sinks.

I want things to change and I truly believe that change starts with each individual voting honestly. That is what I will do Nov. 6th.

I was not a Romney supporter. But he won the nomination and he is running (as a convert, perhaps, to conservatism) now as the standard bearer AGAINST the guy who is fucking things up royally.

Hell, as against the incumbent, I would even vote for Ron Paul. <<gulp>>

Scott Brown is getting his ass kicked by Pocahontas!

*noting this amusing statement for future reference.

 

[Liability]

In my opinion Obama was partly elected in 2008 because McCain was the GOP nominee.

As far as for candidates like Gary Johnson his candidacy is proof positive that the media determines these campaigns and who will get the spotlight.

VP nominee Ryan makes Romney more palatable to many conservatives. His choice allows the lever pull at the ballot box not to stink so much, right?

I don't mind that people vote for Romney but seeing those who once trashed Romney line up and behave as good foot soldiers is a sad reflection of how low the political process sinks.

I want things to change and I truly believe that change starts with each individual voting honestly. That is what I will do Nov. 6th.

I was not a Romney supporter. But he won the nomination and he is running (as a convert, perhaps, to conservatism) now as the standard bearer AGAINST the guy who is fucking things up royally.

Hell, as against the incumbent, I would even vote for Ron Paul. <<gulp>>

Hi Liability.

I get the sentiment and reasoning for voting for Romney. I used to think the same way. I want Obama to lose but I refuse to vote for a candidate who is in the tank for the very things so many of us bitch about every year and every election year especially. I despise the left mentality because they vote for the letter next to the name no matter who is there. Why should I believe it stinks any less if that letter is an R.

I voted for Bush and what did I get? A man who forgot where he put his veto pen. He was very extravagant in domestic spending and far too tolerant of the excesses we saw yet again in Congress.

The parties own far too many people and the votes that they hold.

My vote does not matter so not to worry because Obama is almost without a doubt going to carry my state of Mass no matter which candidate gets my vote. Gary Johnson is my choice and that is voting with honesty. If your vote offered to Romney is an honest one for you then you have nothing to worry about Liability.

My vote for Romney is an honest one and YOU should vote for Romney too.

Here's why.

Most importantly, it will help scrape the incumbent off the bottom of our collective shoe.

Secondly, the two are really not tweedle dee and tweedle dum. That claim is a convenient myth.

I GRANT you that BOTH major political Parties have been responsible for the mess we are in. But the Republican Party HAS made a move back toward reason. The Tea Party is monitoring them.

There are no more easy breezy paths to getting re-elected. For every perfidious GOP Congressman or GOP Senator and even for a GOP President who FAILS to honor the very things we are putting them in to get done, we can and WILL be just as adept at removing them as we have been (so far and hopefully moving forward) in getting them elected.

I think that's the key difference. They are NO LONGER going to get ok'd just for being the more conservative alternative of the contenders. Instead, we will remove them like a busted brake shoe if they don't do what we are DIRECTING them to do -- in matters of principle and in matters of the debt, etc.

Even so, on his WORST possible day he cannot be even half as bad as the incumbent already is. We have to GET that idiot OUT so we can also undo Obamacare and so that WE, not HE and his socialist liberal Democrat Parody friends, get to choose the next couple of so of SCOTUS Justices.

 

[hazlnut]

He's the Nader of 2012.

 

[sitarro]

I saw Gary Johnson on Red Eye.......ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

 

[PredFan]

I'm just looking at the flawed logic in your post. You are looking at Obama's record and using it to predict what he will do. Yet you're ignoring Romney's record and, instead, choosing to trust what he says he'll do. I see no reason to trust either one of them.

Mitt Romney hasn't been POTUS yet. Obama has. No flawed logic there, unless you have some new definition of "logic" that I hadn't previously been aware of.

So we can't look at Romney's record as Governor?

Look all you want to, but don't think I'm buying that it means he'll do the same if he's POTUS. Apples and oranges. The same CANNOT be said about obama. He WAS POTUS the last 4 years and we know quite well what he will do.

 

[PredFan]

Nobody will wake up. The only reason to look forward to a potential Romney Presidency is to simply laugh at the people who said he was so much better than Obama when spending continues to rise. There's no reason to believe they won't defend him, however.

And you. You guys have enough straw soldiers built now to take over a 3rd world country. Very few people here will say that Romney is "so much better" than Obama. but hey, you guys will have to tell yourselves that to keep going day after day I guess.

Get real. There are people on this board who actually think Romney will balance the budget. People who actually think he's going to repeal Obamacare, despite him now saying he's not going to do that. If you think it's a strawman argument to point out that the Republicans on here are trying to paint Romney as a serious and good alternative to Obama then you're not paying attention.

I don't deny that SOME are, most of us admit that we wouldn't have chosen Romney as out candidate but he's better than obama even if only a little bit. That's why we are now supporting him. Which is the point that started this.

 

[PredFan]

I saw Gary Johnson on Red Eye.......ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

This is a major problem and the reason our politics are so fucked up. A person could be the best, the smartest, and the most honorable, but if he doesn't look good on TV, he's toast.

Sad.