Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Serious question.
I haven't completely made up my mind yet on who I will vote for. I would very much like to hear serious responses as to why he should get my vote in the primaries.
Thanks in advance.
Serious question.
I haven't completely made up my mind yet on who I will vote for. I would very much like to hear serious responses as to why he should get my vote in the primaries.
Thanks in advance.
neither of them are capable of winning a general election next year
Serious question.
I haven't completely made up my mind yet on who I will vote for. I would very much like to hear serious responses as to why he should get my vote in the primaries.
Thanks in advance.
He is one of the few candidates that actually KNOWS business and economics. He is not far right rather a little left of center.
1) He has a very successful business record and understands economics based on real world experience (not just from text books [which are usually wrong] like Obama).
2) His approach to foreign trade seems solid (I'd like to see some more details there but so far so good)
3) He has experience in the executive branch of government and was forced to work with an opposition party. I heard on Thursday his legislature was 85% Democrat so that will force you to learn how to work with the other side.
4) Despite having executive experience as the governor of Massachusetts he doesn't have so much that he's a "Washington Insider".
5) Despite what people bitch and whine about, he's conservative enough for me. I keep in mind that during the 2008 election cycle he was actually the "real conservative's choice" and the hero of CPAC...now he's a RINO. Yeah ok, whatever.
6) He stands the best chance of beating Obama. The hard core conservatives will argue this point to death but I have not found their arguments to be convincing in any way. The polls are pretty clear that Romney is more accepted by moderates and Independents than Gingrich and those are the voters that swing elections.
neither of them are capable of winning a general election next year
oh and:
7) TM hates him. If there's ever any reason why someone would think Romney will be a great president it's that TM thinks he will suck.
Romney is not (yet) my first choice of GOP candidates but he is on my short list.
1. He is polling very very strongly against Barack Obama. At this time (which could change by tomorrow or any other time) the polls show he is the one most likely to beat Barack Obama.
2. He isn't a wild eyed off the wall radical but I believe would give careful and reasoned consideration to what he will and will not support.
3. He brings a strong skill set to the position and no serious policy negatives.
4. He seems like a good, decent man with few, if any, ego issues and would not be an embarrassment to the nation either at home or abroad.
The only serious downside that I see is that he is the left's media darling--he is the one THEY most want which bothers me a lot--and he is also the first choice of the old guard GOP establishment which also concerns me. Still he has received the endorsement of several prominent Tea Partiers and the Tea Party movement has not rejected him.
Im not supporting any candidate yet, but I can give you a number of reasons:
He has leadership experience in private, public, and non-profit sectors. Not just being in a position of power, but actually accomplshing things
He has a record of eliminating corruption in the private sector and during his time running the Olympics. I don't know his record as Mass on eliminating corruption. But I know from his record that he himself isn't corrupt.
He was able to reduce spending in Massachusetts.
He has no character issues like some of the candidates do.
He has experience creating businsess and jobs.
He cares about others more than money.
Serious question.
I haven't completely made up my mind yet on who I will vote for. I would very much like to hear serious responses as to why he should get my vote in the primaries.
Thanks in advance.
Romney vs. who? Gingrich, Obama, or just in general?
I would say for me the things that put Romney over Gingrich are the following.
1) He has a very successful business record and understands economics based on real world experience (not just from text books [which are usually wrong] like Obama).
2) His approach to foreign trade seems solid (I'd like to see some more details there but so far so good)
3) He has experience in the executive branch of government and was forced to work with an opposition party. I heard on Thursday his legislature was 85% Democrat so that will force you to learn how to work with the other side.
4) Despite having executive experience as the governor of Massachusetts he doesn't have so much that he's a "Washington Insider".
5) Despite what people bitch and whine about, he's conservative enough for me. I keep in mind that during the 2008 election cycle he was actually the "real conservative's choice" and the hero of CPAC...now he's a RINO. Yeah ok, whatever.
6) He stands the best chance of beating Obama. The hard core conservatives will argue this point to death but I have not found their arguments to be convincing in any way. The polls are pretty clear that Romney is more accepted by moderates and Independents than Gingrich and those are the voters that swing elections.
I haven't heard anything at all about trade. Where does he stand?
As a former Romney supporter (2008), I just have lost all my enthusiasm for this guy. Instead of running on what he really believes, he has tried to make himself into something he is not. The good thing about Romney is that if he is elected, he will not be a conservative. What he will do is raise taxes, and get the budget in order. He will push through some small spending cuts, but mostly he will raise taxes, the same way that Ronald Reagan did.
Yes, Ronnie talked the conservative talk, but he walked the pragmatists walk. He was a very smart man. He understood government could not operate with too little revenue, and he also understood that there was only so much you could cut out of government. Romney would govern pretty much the same as Obama. He just wouldn't be called a Marxist every five seconds by the right wing nut jobs.
China has an interest in trade. China has 20 million people coming out of the farms and coming into the cities every year, they want to be able to put them to work. They want to have access to global markets. And so we have right now something they need very badly, which is access to our market and our friends around the world, we have that power over China. To make sure that we let them understand that in order for them to continue to have free and open access to the thing they want so badly, our markets, they have to play by the rules.
They can't hack into our computer systems and steal from our government. They can't steal patents and designs from corporations. And they also can't manipulate their currency in such a way as to make their prices well below what they otherwise would be.
We have to have China understand that like everybody else on the world stage, they have to play by the rules. And if they do, we'll have open trade with them and work with them.
Q: How can the US make China follow the rules of international trade?
Romney: Well number one, on day one, it's acknowledging something which everyone knows, they're a currency manipulator. And on that basis, we also go before the W.T.O. [World Trade Organization] and bring an action against them as a currency manipulator. And that allows us to apply, selectively, tariffs where we believe they are stealing our intellectual property, hacking into our computers, or artificially lowering their prices and killing American jobs. We can't just sit back and let China run all over People say, "Well, you'll start a trade war." There's one going on right now, folks. They're stealing our jobs. And we're going to stand up to China.
Source: 2011 debate in South Carolina on Foreign Policy , Nov 12, 2011
US companies faced with innovative and less costly products from overseas have to make one of two choices. They can invest in new technologies, innovations, and productivity improvements themselves and beat the foreign competition at its own game--a process that often requires unions and suppliers to make adjustments.
Alternatively, US companies can argue for protection, hold on as long as possible, and slowly watch their market share wane
The case for trade makes good economic sense--trade improves the wages and standard of living for the average citizen. But trade can disrupt and devastate those individuals directly affected. Owners and shareholders may lose money, of course. But it is the employees and managers, from the shop floor to the drifting tables to delivery trucks, who take the brunt of the pain. Trade is good for the nation and for the average citizen, but it is decidedly not good for everybody.
Source: No Apology, by Mitt Romney, p.114-115 , Mar 2, 2010
What's all this "bandwagon" talk? If a candidate jumps in the polls you immediately support him? Why?
Mitt Romney is Obama with an "R" next to his name.
I haven't heard anything at all about trade. Where does he stand?
Thus far what he has said in debates has been pretty vague and like I said I'd like to hear more details....how does he intend to do this or that?
But here's some reading for you that kind of sums it up:
Trade | Mitt Romney for President
FACT SHEET: MITT ROMNEY
An American Century
Romney would be tough on China, he says - The Washington Post
