Who's more conservative: Newt or Mitt?

[LoneLaugher]

I love this thread. Let's bump this one up on an hourly basis. Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaauuuuuuutiful!

 

[California Girl]

I don't think either is a true conservative, but these are the choices we've been presented.

I left out Santorum and Paul. I'll concede both are more conservative in their own way than either of the frontrunners...but this poll is targeted between the two frontrunners only.

Mitt is consistently more conservative, but doesn't matter because Newt is not worthy to be the nominee.

It should worry both of us that we agree.

 

[derk]

I don't think either is a true conservative, but these are the choices we've been presented.

I left out Santorum and Paul. I'll concede both are more conservative in their own way than either of the frontrunners...but this poll is targeted between the two frontrunners only.

Thats still worth a few miles in political stock. And I bet Newt can capitalize on the RomBama Care thing and turn it into an us vs. them platform. Look what the Tea Party got out of it in the electorate revolution of 2010! Hell don't forget about the republican revolution!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Newt kills the publican revolution in his very being.

 

[Amelia]

I don't think either is a true conservative, but these are the choices we've been presented.

I left out Santorum and Paul. I'll concede both are more conservative in their own way than either of the frontrunners...but this poll is targeted between the two frontrunners only.

Thats still worth a few miles in political stock. And I bet Newt can capitalize on the RomBama Care thing and turn it into an us vs. them platform. Look what the Tea Party got out of it in the electorate revolution of 2010! Hell don't forget about the republican revolution!

Um, yeah, that will work.

Newt in 1993: "I am for people, individuals — exactly like automobile insurance — individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance.”


In 2005: "Our goal has to be for 100 percent of the country to be in the insurance system. So that means finding ways through tax credits and through vouchers so that every American can buy insurance, including, I think, a requirement that if you’re above a certain level of income, you have to either have insurance or post a bond."


In 2009: "Those who oppose the concept of insurance should be forced to post a bond to cover costs. Allowing individuals to pass their health costs on to others reinforces the attitude that their health is not their problem and adds to the irresponsible, unhealthy behaviors that bankrupt the current system."

 

[Seawytch]

Yes, these issues are not really on his agenda as his true agenda is our economy.

I really don't see his presidency making one bit of difference in public policy...

Okay, he's not a conservative. A conservative would never support an amendment that denied people rights.

I don't believe Romney intends to deny anybody their rights...

I'm, then why would he say...

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2011/08/1...defining-marriage-as-between-a-man-and-woman/

 

[Ravi]

Okay, he's not a conservative. A conservative would never support an amendment that denied people rights.

I don't believe Romney intends to deny anybody their rights...

I'm, then why would he say...

Romney: We Need Constitutional Amendment Defining Marriage as Between a Man and Woman | Fox News Insider

Yeah. Why, Val?

 

[Valerie]

I don't believe Romney intends to deny anybody their rights...

I'm, then why would he say...

Romney: We Need Constitutional Amendment Defining Marriage as Between a Man and Woman | Fox News Insider

Yeah. Why, Val?

How does the definition of a word deny anyone their rights...?

 

[Avatar4321]

Okay, he's not a conservative. A conservative would never support an amendment that denied people rights.

I don't believe Romney intends to deny anybody their rights...

I'm, then why would he say...

Romney: We Need Constitutional Amendment Defining Marriage as Between a Man and Woman | Fox News Insider

Because he wants to protect the family.

No rights would be denied. Despite what some of you progressives would like to pretend otherwise.

 

[derk]

I don't think either is a true conservative, but these are the choices we've been presented.

I left out Santorum and Paul. I'll concede both are more conservative in their own way than either of the frontrunners...but this poll is targeted between the two frontrunners only.

Thats still worth a few miles in political stock. And I bet Newt can capitalize on the RomBama Care thing and turn it into an us vs. them platform. Look what the Tea Party got out of it in the electorate revolution of 2010! Hell don't forget about the republican revolution!

Um, yeah, that will work.

Newt in 1993: "I am for people, individuals — exactly like automobile insurance — individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance.”


In 2005: "Our goal has to be for 100 percent of the country to be in the insurance system. So that means finding ways through tax credits and through vouchers so that every American can buy insurance, including, I think, a requirement that if you’re above a certain level of income, you have to either have insurance or post a bond."


In 2009: "Those who oppose the concept of insurance should be forced to post a bond to cover costs. Allowing individuals to pass their health costs on to others reinforces the attitude that their health is not their problem and adds to the irresponsible, unhealthy behaviors that bankrupt the current system."

Thanks Amelia. I knew his pack was for health care being addressed nationaly and he even wrote about it. And I was aware of the flip flops. Still: He thinks that health care should be competitive and allowed to cross state lines. Competition would lower prices and provide more choices.

• He would give tax credits for developing the technology to help and prevent disabilities.

• Gingrich thinks Medicare should focus on preventative health instead of illness and that we’d save $14 billion on diabetes treatments alone.

• He thinks the government does not belong in health care. Nationalizing health care hurts everyone.
Gingrich on Health Care

Maybe Newt Gingrich is the one candidate Amelia, who having explored the concept of health care; can help us with a solution that has less government involvement.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Derp is silly. Now Newt is against the mandate after he was for it? Hmmm. . . that sounds like . . . gasp . . . Mitt?

 

[Seawytch]

I'm, then why would he say...

Romney: We Need Constitutional Amendment Defining Marriage as Between a Man and Woman | Fox News Insider

Yeah. Why, Val?

How does the definition of a word deny anyone their rights...?

Because the Supreme Court of the United States of America has declared that marriage is a fundamental right. Mitt Romney wants to deny that fundamental right to gay and lesbian couples, thousands of whom are already legally married. That would equal taking rights away.

Why would anyone want to deny someone a fundamental right based on the definition of a word?

Oh, and that was supposed to be um, not I'm...damn autocorrect!

 

[JoeB131]

Finally. Gingrich might have toyed with a mandate, but Mittens made one happen.

Totally.

I'm thumbing through catalogs now to figure out what I'm going to wear next year after Obama's 2nd inauguration.


I'm too depressed today to even argue about the states' rights versus federal overreach issue you're in denial of.

Honestly, I know that "but, but that was a STATE level bit of Crony Capitalism interference in your life that doesn't address the underlying problem" is the standard defense of Romney's inventing the horrid idea that Obama eventually copied.


But if Obama's going to get a second term, it's because too many people see government being on their side and the private sector being not so much.

 

[JoeB131]

I don't think either is a true conservative, but these are the choices we've been presented.

I left out Santorum and Paul. I'll concede both are more conservative in their own way than either of the frontrunners...but this poll is targeted between the two frontrunners only.

Mitt is consistently more conservative, but doesn't matter because Newt is not worthy to be the nominee.

It should worry both of us that we agree.

I'm sure you won't think that Fake Snarkey (an obvious liberal on social and defense issues) agreeing Romney's the one is worrysome at all...

That would require too much thought as to why liberals are so keen on Romney getting the nomination.

 

[JakeStarkey]

JoeBigot is not a Republican and I have been voting GOP for almost forty years.

Yes, Newt will lead the newtlemmings over the political cliff.

 

[JoeB131]

JoeBigot is not a Republican and I have been voting GOP for almost forty years.

Yes, Newt will lead the newtlemmings over the political cliff.

I've been voting Republican for 32 years, and I won't vote for Romney.

Ever.

If you think Newt is a bad candidate, come up with a better one. Because it sure isn't the Weird Mormon Robot trying out the new "fighting chip" the Disney techs plugged into him last night.

I mean, seriously, the guy couldn't have looked more phony if he tried.

You almost imagine a conversation like this went on.

Advisor 1 _"Wow, Newt really cleaned our clocks in South Carolina!"

Advisor 2- "Yeah, I noticed that. How'd that happen? I thought we had this guy beat."

Advisor 1- "Well, it was because he was feisty in the debates. We need to get our guy feisty, too."

Advisor 2- "I"ll start rewriting the software."

What these fools fail to realize is that what put Newt over the top was not his taking on Mittens (in other words, no longer letting Mitt's BS go unanswered like he did in Iowa) but taking on the liberal media and their reconceptions about Conservatives.

Mittens and his programming team think, "Hey, we need to attack Newt personally now instead of just letting our PACs do it." That didn't work for him against McCain for years ago and it won't work now.

Nope. What has won Conservatives over is that Newt is the guy who is being unapologetically conservative, not checking a poll to see what a focus group might like.

 

[Valerie]

Yeah. Why, Val?

How does the definition of a word deny anyone their rights...?

Because the Supreme Court of the United States of America has declared that marriage is a fundamental right. Mitt Romney wants to deny that fundamental right to gay and lesbian couples, thousands of whom are already legally married. That would equal taking rights away.

Why would anyone want to deny someone a fundamental right based on the definition of a word?

Oh, and that was supposed to be um, not I'm...damn autocorrect!

The SCOTUS declared the fundamental right to marriage as a legal concept of liberty and privacy but that right is not conveyed or denied by virtue of the terms used to describe it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

JoeBigot is not a Republican and I have been voting GOP for almost forty years.

Yes, Newt will lead the newtlemmings over the political cliff.

SNIP .

Joe has said elsewhere that he is not a Republican, so take what he writes above for what it is worth: a snip on a messageboard.

 

[Full-Auto]

Derp is silly. Now Newt is against the mandate after he was for it? Hmmm. . . that sounds like . . . gasp . . . Mitt?

None of thee above.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Derp is silly. Now Newt is against the mandate after he was for it? Hmmm. . . that sounds like . . . gasp . . . Mitt?

None of thee above.

Yep, all of the above. It is what it is. He can't take back what he said.