Mitt Romney against the debt deal

[JakeStarkey]

I don't have to refute an opinion with evidence, Joe: I just have to point out your opinion is only your opinion.

No religious tests are prohibited in the Constitution. I told you did not know our Constitution or it history.

Your opinion on Mormons is your opinion, and it is a rather stupid one, I think. But go for it.

You would call both Kennedy and Reagan liberal by your far right reactionary beliefs.

Check the realclearpolitics.com polls on your last statement. (see, that is posting evidence to your assertion).

 

[JoeB131]

I don't have to refute an opinion with evidence, Joe: I just have to point out your opinion is only your opinion..

Then counter it with an opinion based on observation. Point out where a simpering RINO moderate has ever won a national election since,oh, 1976 or so. It doesn't happen. You know why, because the rank and file hard core Republicans might vote for this joker, but they won't go out and campaign for him, won't go out and ring doorbells, etc.

No religious tests are prohibited in the Constitution. I told you did not know our Constitution or it history.

It isn't a constitutional issue. It's a judgement issue. Are his beliefs sufficiently nutty where I would question his reason and judgement and integrity? In the case of Mormons, the answer is yes. Because Mormonism crosses the fine line between a religion and a cult, despite the PR job the folks in SLC have engaged in.

Your opinion on Mormons is your opinion, and it is a rather stupid one, I think. But go for it.

If Mormons were proud of their silly beliefs, they'd shout them from the rooftops. The white shirted Missionaries don't break out the Book of Mormon and start telling people about Lamanites and how Dark Skin is a Curse from God. If you have to hide the crazy, at some level you know it's crazy. Romney is hoping people think like you do and won't ask about the crazy.

And he's right. The MSM won't. Until AFTER he gets the nomination.

Of course, there's enough other reasons why we should reject Romney that have nothing to do with his religion, not the least of which is how he doesn't seem to have any core convictions. Hey remember when he was the "Far Right" candidate? So do I. It was 2008, because his handlers told him McCain and Guiliani had the moderate side of the street sewn up.

You would call both Kennedy and Reagan liberal by your far right reactionary beliefs.

No, I'd call them that by where we place issues today. Pro-Life, Pro-defense, low taxes = Conservative today. JFK by today's lights would be conservative.

Check the realclearpolitics.com polls on your last statement. (see, that is posting evidence to your assertion).

If I had believed RCP Polls in 2007, the 2008 election would have been a contest between Rudy Guiliani and Hillary Clinton. Only about 20% of Republicans are supporting the Android from Kolob right now, despite the millions he's spending and his name recognition and the fact the MSM is giving him the "McCain Treatment" right now. The conservative base is looking for a standard bearer, and when they do, Romney will lose just like he did in 2008.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Opinion is like a fart. Lots of wind, no substance. Give supported and good evidence, and we can talk.

Your judgement on Romney is wrong. I think Mormons are guilty of bad theology, but I think of evangelicals and Catholics and others, as well. None of that prevents me from voting for them. Jefferson's and Lincoln's lack of Christian witness would not have prevented me from voting for either one.

I believe you are playing with definitions all of your own on Reagan and Kennedy, who are liberal by Tea Party standards.

You would rather believe your opinions than the polls. That is what I was waiting for.

 

[JoeB131]

Opinion is like a fart. Lots of wind, no substance. Give supported and good evidence, and we can talk.

I could make a comment about how liberals are fascinated with that part of the body, but I'll refrain... I'm kind of done talking to you, and have moved on to outright mocking.

Duly noted you were unable to refute my initial premise after a day of obfuscation and trying to change the subject.

Your judgement on Romney is wrong. I think Mormons are guilty of bad theology, but I think of evangelicals and Catholics and others, as well. None of that prevents me from voting for them. Jefferson's and Lincoln's lack of Christian witness would not have prevented me from voting for either one.

It's not "bad theology" (I'm an agnostic, there's no "good" theology in my mind), it's outright fraud. We know that Hebrews never settled in the Americas, that the Book of Mormon was a fraud written by Joseph Smith because scamming through religion was easier than scamming with gold finding schemes, which was his previous racket. And he did it so he could seduce teenage girls, for which his neighbors took him out and shot him.

I became an agnostic because I had to evaluate the logic of my beliefs and found them wanting. Romney, whom apparently is an intelligent guy, accepts this utter nonsense as true, which tells me I can't trust his reasoning skills. I also don't trust a cult that seems to want to hide what it is up to. For instance, they were the driving force behind Prop 8, but we didn't find that out until after the election. LDS families emptied their kid's college funds to keep gays from marrying (something you are supposedly for, right?) But you are going to trust one to run the country? Really?

I believe you are playing with definitions all of your own on Reagan and Kennedy, who are liberal by Tea Party standards.

No, not really. JFK and Reagan thought taxes were too high and too onerous. That puts them in with the TEA party. (I personally think we need to reform taxes, and maybe raise them after the economy recovers.) It's a pretty simple definition. How much agreement is there on issues.

You would rather believe your opinions than the polls. That is what I was waiting for.

No, man, what you are waiting for is some fool to believe you are really a Republican.

Good luck with that.

Polls don't mean anything at this point, because most people haven't thought about it that much. FURTHER- the polls don't say what you say they do.

The GOP is not hungering for another moderate. If you take a look at that poll, and add up the moderates (Guiliani and Romney) you get less than 30%. You add up the real conservatives (Palin, Perry, Bachmann, Cain, Santorum, Gingrich) you get a total of 49%.

Romney will lose the nomination, and then you'll show your true colors as an Obama supporter.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Joe would rather believe the voices in his head than the polls, than those who are better informed than him. It is good to see you at least examining them. For right now, Obama beats everybody but Romney, and Romney is beating all GOP except in one poll.

Time may tell differently. I will work for Romney, vote for Perry if I must, but will not support the lame stream reactionary candidates like Bachmann and Palin, who are completely out of the American mainstream politically and culturally.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe, would rather believe the voices in his head than the polls, than those who are better informed than him. It is good to see you at least examining them. For right now, Obama beats everybody but Romney, and Romney is beating all GOP except in one poll.

Time may tell differently. I will work for Romney, vote for Perry if I must, but will not support the lame stream reactionary candidates like Bachmann and Palin, who are completely out of the American mainstream politically and culturally.

I won't believe polls because they are wrong and they are unreliable... as I have proven.

Hey, wasn't that Hillary/Rudy election we had in 2008 fun? Oh, wait. No. We didn't have that election. Because Polls in 2007 said Obama was in third place and McCain was in fourth place. But those were the guys who won their nominations.

Polls are bullshit, and you know they are bullshit.

Here's the poll I pay attention to. I've been posting here for about a month now after being called a liberal on Townhall and a reactionary on StraightDope, and do you know how many Romney supporters I've seen here on this board that is probably 70/30 Conservative?

One. You. That's it. And your support is largely based on how much you hate Palin (who isn't running) and Bachmann. You have yet to tell me why I should vote FOR Romney, just why I should vote against people I probably wasn't going to vote for to start with.

 

[Steelplate]

Ummm... can I ask a question? What's wrong with being a moderate? Why are we constantly trying to pigeonhole people into neat little groups of "liberal" and "conservative"? This kind of dissension (you're either with us or against us) is what is helping to ruin this country.

That being said... as far as Romney and the debt ceiling goes.... eh.... It's easy to say you're for or against something when you have ZERO political skin in the game. Right now... he's kind of like a chameleon, trying not to risk much of anything because at the moment, he's the front runner in the GOP battle.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Joe, would rather believe the voices in his head than the polls, than those who are better informed than him. It is good to see you at least examining them. For right now, Obama beats everybody but Romney, and Romney is beating all GOP except in one poll.

Time may tell differently. I will work for Romney, vote for Perry if I must, but will not support the lame stream reactionary candidates like Bachmann and Palin, who are completely out of the American mainstream politically and culturally.

I won't believe polls because they are wrong and they are unreliable... as I have proven.

Hey, wasn't that Hillary/Rudy election we had in 2008 fun? Oh, wait. No. We didn't have that election. Because Polls in 2007 said Obama was in third place and McCain was in fourth place. But those were the guys who won their nominations.

Polls are bullshit, and you know they are bullshit.

Here's the poll I pay attention to. I've been posting here for about a month now after being called a liberal on Townhall and a reactionary on StraightDope, and do you know how many Romney supporters I've seen here on this board that is probably 70/30 Conservative?

One. You. That's it. And your support is largely based on how much you hate Palin (who isn't running) and Bachmann. You have yet to tell me why I should vote FOR Romney, just why I should vote against people I probably wasn't going to vote for to start with.

You have proven only that you dislike the polls, not they are always or mostly or even half the time wrong. Once again your opinion and unbalanced evidence is not conclusive at all.

You should vote for Romney because he is a Republican who can lead us to victory. I don't Sarah or Michelle; calling them loons is an act of awareness, not hate.

 

[Jarhead]

personally, I am disappointed that not a single GOP potential candidate stepped up with an idea regarding the debt ceiling debate.
They all sat in the wings and waited for a deal and now the likes of Mitt Romney come out and criticize the deal.
The only one that was vocal was Bachmann...and of course the left jumped all over her...
But at least she had the guts to offer her opinion.
I like that in a leader.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jarhead is correct, in my opinion, that wannabee leaders should lead. I won't vote for Michelle, but she at least did what she said she believed up front. Mitt can learn from that.

 

[Jarhead]

Jarhead is correct, in my opinion, that wannabee leaders should lead. I won't vote for Michelle, but she at least did what she said she believed up front. Mitt can learn from that.

Im not a MIchelle fan either...but I have not written her off.
But the rest of the feild?
Where the hell have they been the last 3 weeks?

 

[JoeB131]

You have proven only that you dislike the polls, not they are always or mostly or even half the time wrong. Once again your opinion and unbalanced evidence is not conclusive at all.

You should vote for Romney because he is a Republican who can lead us to victory. I don't Sarah or Michelle; calling them loons is an act of awareness, not hate.

Like I said, after the whole 2008 fiasco, I generally tend to ignore polls because they are useless at this point.
The only things the Polls prove at this point is more people have heard of Romney, and frankly, they don't think much of him.

I don't think Romney can lead the GOP to victory. If he could, you'd see the MSM attacking him vigorously right now, and they aren't. Here- once again because you can't logically refute them- are why he is a bad candidate.

1) Mormonism- Yeah, you can whine about how I'm not respecting his religion, but the fact is, 22% of Americans say they won't vote for an LDS, including 18% of Republicans and 19% of independents. (Funny, you keep IGNORING that poll!) I suspect the real number is a lot higher, or will get a lot higher when the MSM starts educating the rest of us on how crazy Mormonism is.

In U.S., 22% Are Hesitant to Support a Mormon in 2012

2) Bain - Here's a key one. He made his money essentially going in, looting companies and laying people off. Not the kind of guy you put up when you have people terrified they might move your job to China is a guy who made money moving people's jobs to China.

3) ObamaCare, the Beta Version - Romney developed the model that ObamaCare with its hated mandates has become. If the GOP plans to run against ObamaCare, it doesn't help to concede your best point. Just like Palin undermined the experience argument against Obama, Romney would undermine the ObamaCare argument.

4) He's boring - Seriously, ever watch this guy speak. It's like watching an android repeat lines. I keep looking for the cable sticking out of his back.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Thank you for saying you don't trust polls but use them to try to convince me.

If the poll about Mormons is correct and if the far right evangelical/fundamentalist/stupidist wring of Christian Republicans will not for them, yet Obama wins because a major larger majority of Americans will never vote for a far right candidate, then that is on the stupidists.

#2 is irrelevant.

#3 Obamacare is going to blow up in the far right's face. Watch.

#4 Then pick Sarah or Michelle, who are truly exciting eye candy, and watch our GOP get its ass handed to it.

 

[JoeB131]

1) That same poll says that 19% of independents and 29% of Democrats won't vote for an LDS, either.

I'm an agnostic, I won't vote for LDS, for reasons stated.

2) No, guy, it's completely relevent. Remember, Democrats operate on simpering victims. Just let them drag out some victims of companies Romney closed down... It's how Ted Kennedy beat him in 1994, and it's how Obama could beat him this time.

3) Much of the MIDDLE hates ObamaCare. It isn't a right/left issue. Americans don't like being told to DO THINGS they didn't plan to do.

Again, since you are SOOOOO in love with Polls, Polls show that ObamaCare is massively unpopular.

Health Care Law - Rasmussen Reports™

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters shows that 55% at least somewhat favor repeal of the national health care law, including 42% who Strongly Favor it. Thirty-nine percent (39%) at least somewhat oppose repeal of the law, including 29% who are Strongly Opposed.

And you'd give away the GOP's best argument? Seriously?

4) Why do you keep talking about Palin, who isn't even running? Bachmann, I think is the Howard Dean of this campaign.

Moderates don't win. Committed conservatives do. Two days later, you've still dodged that point.

 

[Avatar4321]

Obamacare isn't going to blow up in anyone's face. it was dead on arrival.

If anything it's going to kill too many people. Unfortunately, people still will advocate for it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

1) Then the far right wing Christian haters will limit the opportunity for victory to Perry.

2) Kennedy beat Romney because it was Catholic Democratic Massachusetts not because of business tactics.

3) You have no stats that show that the middle class great majority hate Obama care. The poor like it, of course; and the middle class is coming around to it. Go check the polls. That "repeal" means "reform". But I am glad you are learning how to play in the land of reality.

4) Eisenhower won. Nixon won as a conservative, governed as a liberal, and won. Reagan won as a conservative who could pull centrists, as did Bush the Elder (one time), and Bush the Younger (twice). The far right has fractured and will be of no significance after South Carolina next year, at which time Romney and Perry will fight out.

5) One will pick the other as his veep candidate.

Moderates and conservatives win when the pull the center. That's what has you impaled like a pin on a fly.

 

[HenryBHough]

You should vote for Romney because he is a Republican who can lead us to victory. I don't Sarah or Michelle; calling them loons is an act of awareness, not hate.

Disagreeing with their policies is one thing. Name-calling stinks like the most Liberal ploys Chicago can exude.

Romney, indeed, should be your choice for President BECAUSE HE'S ABOUT THREE PACES TO THE LEFT OF OBAMA. Now that's not name-calling; it's honest reflection on his voting record over many years, not to mention his having created the prototype for Obamacare.

 

[JakeStarkey]

TeaPots name call worse than anybody, HenryB. Don't be silly, please. Most Americans think Sarah and Michelle act and are loony.

 

[Toro]

Palin took a shot at Romney over his debt deal stance.

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said Tuesday night she does not respect how Mitt Romney, former Massachusetts governor and the GOP’s presidential front-runner, has handled the recent debate over raising the debt ceiling.

“Bless his heart, I have respect for Mitt Romney, but I do not have respect for what he has done though this debt increase debate,” Ms. Palin said on Fox News, where she is a paid contributor. “He waited until it was a done deal… and then he came out and made a statement that ‘aw, he didn’t like the deal after all.’”

“He did this,” she said, as she licked her index finger and raised it to show he was testing the political winds.

Palin Takes Jab at Romney Over Debt Ceiling - Washington Wire - WSJ

Gotta say, she's right on this one.

 

[dblack]

Because the best way to get someone to pay back their debt is to throw them in prison.

I could see it. If they hook up with the right people in prison... I suspect a lot of deadbeats just never learned about networking.