If a GOP candidate that you dont support wins the preidency...

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Will you try to support them? Hope they are successful? Even if you aren't a republican?

When Obama won I had hoped his rhetoric was truthful and that he would be honest with the people and not see issues through partisan eyes. I hoped his promise to have an open govt was real. I had hoped his promise to make legislation publicly viewable several days prior to a vote was true. I had hoped that his promise to bring us together was followed through on.

Of course as a republican I doubted these promises but I still hoped he ment it none the less.

Is our country so ideologically bound that no man could make good on these kinds of promises?

 

[JoeB131]

Depends who wins.

If it's Romney, he'll be a failed, one term President just like he was a failed one-term governor.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Depends who wins.

If it's Romney, he'll be a failed, one term President just like he was a failed one-term governor.

Your hatred for Romney is deep. I still don't understand it to be more than he is a slimy Mormon. Maybe I missed the post where you explained it in depth. I would like to believe it isn't just religious intolerance.

 

[rightwinger]

Regardless of party, I will always support a new President. It is in all of our best interest

 

[Foxfyre]

I will be horrified if Ron Paul wins the GOP nomination because though I like him personally and he does have some principles and concepts right, some of his other views are so looney tunes I think he could be dangerous if supported in those views. I fear no other GOP candidate running though I am leaning toward some more than others. But I would support Paul in his common sense views and initiatives arising from those. I would continue to oppose him when he drifts into the looney tunes.

Like Grandpa, I started out supporting and holding sincere hopes for Barack Obama, but I was snapped back to reality pretty quickly. He has presided pretty much 180 from how he campaigned. I will not support Barack Obama should he win a second term because, like Paul but for different reasons, I see him as dangerous and our only hope is to resist him as much as possible in the damage he intends, knowingly or unknowingly, for this country.

As dangerous as I could see a Ron Paul might be, I would vote for him in a heartbeat if the choices are Ron Paul vs Barack Obama. There is no way he would be as destructive.

As for the other GOP candiates, any one of them would be heads and shoulders above Barack Obama as a good POTUS and I would look for ways to support them in their presidency any way that I could. And I would oppose them when they got away from solid conservative principles just as I adamently opposed George W. Bush and every previous president when they got away from solid conservative principles.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Is our country so ideologically bound that no man could make good on these kinds of promises?

Yes.

Look at the NDAA debate occurring now.

Despite citing the actual language from the bill indicating no American citizen will be subject to neither indefinite detention nor trial in a military court, the president’s enemies believe he’s authorized just that.

In this age of hyper-partisan extremism, where facts are ignored and incorrect rhetoric taken for fact, no president will be accurately judged as to whether or not he abided by his promises.

 

[dblack]

As long as I'm living in the US, as long as I'm a US citizen, I'll totally want them to be 'successful'. I'll hope for the best and support their efforts to do the right thing for our country.

That said, if I see them going in a direction I disagree with, I'll call them out on it.

 

[JoeB131]

Depends who wins.

If it's Romney, he'll be a failed, one term President just like he was a failed one-term governor.

Your hatred for Romney is deep. I still don't understand it to be more than he is a slimy Mormon. Maybe I missed the post where you explained it in depth. I would like to believe it isn't just religious intolerance.

Well, yeah, his religion is a big part of it. Of course, I'm an atheist, and I really have no love for ANY religion. Mormonism offends me a bit more because the fraud is obvious. Kind of like L. Ron Hubbard saying that you could make a fortune founding a religion instead of writing Science Fiction for a penny a word, and going on to found Scientology. Joseph Smith founded a religion because it was easier than fooling people into thinking he could find gold with a divining rod. (His previous scam, for which he was convicted of fraud in 1825).

But even if I were to ignore his religion, there are a lot of other things about the guy that are just skeezy.

Let's take his business practices. He essentially made his fortune putting people out of jobs, sending jobs overseas, and so on. And here's the thing. He didn't need the money. He was already rich from money he inherited from his father, George Romney. Honestly, I thought most Christians considered greed and avarice to be sins.

I also don't like the fact he will say just about anything to get elected. When he was running for Senate in 1994, he loudly proclaimed he was pro-choice, said he'd be better on gay rights than Ted Kennedy, denounced Reagan and Bush as the wrong kind of Republicans, and so on. He was equally liberal when he ran for governor.

But then he got it into his head to run for President, and realized you had to be anti-gay and pro-life to win in Republican Primaries. So he had a Saul on the Road to Damascus conversion on these issues. Amazing.

I really dislike it when a politician lies to me. I dislike it more if they act like we are stupid and have no memory.

Here's another more recent and blatant example. When he was losing in 2008, he made a stand in Michigan that he would do whatever it took to save the Auto Industry, even government bailouts. Good politics, it kept him alive until Super Tuesday. We wouldn't be hearing from him today if he lost that primary.

But then Obama actually bit the bullet and did the bailout. Without arguing the merits of the bailout, they were unpopular with the GOP rank and file. Now, suddenly, Romney was against bailouts and thought the Auto Industry should have been allowed to go into bankruptcy. Really.

I'd love to be able to say "I'm Against Romney and everything he stands for" because honestly, I don't know what he stands for.

 

[Charles_Main]

The Same as when a Democrat is in office. If I like what they want to do, I will support it. If I don't I wont. I am not Loyal to a Party, I am loyal to ideas.

 

[Foxfyre]

As long as I'm living in the US, as long as I'm a US citizen, I'll totally want them to be 'successful'. I'll hope for the best and support their efforts to do the right thing for our country.

That said, if I see them going in a direction I disagree with, I'll call them out on it.

Successful even in policy or initiatives that you think are destructive and/or dangerous? Barack Obama said that stimulus package was 'right for the country'. It has turned out to be anything but. As a responsible citizen do you promote his success no matter how destructive the outcome?

Pray for them to lead responsibly, capably, and with integrity and insight, yes.
Hope they choose to do the right thing, yes.
Want them to do the right thing, yes.

Honorable people want all that.

But support them when you know they are wrong or are being intentionally disingenous or destructive? No way.