I dont want to see Christy as a vp pick

[whitehall]

Rhetoric is good. It would be a welcome change for republicans who have been afraid of the liberal media for so long. Gingrich's response to liberal reporter John King's ambush question during the debate galvanized the crowd. George Bush was a good man but he was weak on rhetoric. War hero John McCain told us his campaign was the "straight talk express" but that was a joke. Mush mouth McCain wouldn't even allow his workers to mention his opponent's middle name. We could use some strong talk from a strong leader. Even if Christie is weak on conservative social issues he would be a welcome relief and we could work with him.

 

[JoeB131]

He is a new governor. Kind of an unknown. Heavy on rhetoric but a noob on results.

He just passed a tax cut of ten percent in his state despite their deficit, whereas the left deems it foolish. I want to see his plan work. Then he could translate that message nationally. If he is successful as a governor he would make a great candidate in the future.

I can't see what he'd add to any ticket. The kind of people who get excited about him are the kind of people who are going to vote Republican anyway. Unless there is a major lack of enthusiasm for the Weird Mormon Robot after he bullies his way to the nomination, I just don't see what he adds to the ticket.

We'd have a ticket of two north-eastern Governors when the GOP doesn't really have a prayer of winning either of their states in November.

Romney would be best served by taking Mitch Daniels as a running-mate. Solid conservative, good record, etc.

Not that Romney would ever listen to my advice, he's likely to reward some loyalist who backed him early.

 

[JoeB131]

You seem to think that I'm a huge fan of Romney. I'm not. But the more I see of him, the more comfortable I am with him. Frankly, I'm not overly worried about shifting position on social issues. I don't care what his stance is on abortion. I'm pro-life... but I accept that I don't have the right to inflict my view on others. That ain't flip flopping... it's called a commitment to liberty.... even when it is personally difficult.

Romney's biggest asset is his real work, honest to God, experience in business. He understands business, and economics.... and, right now, we need that more than we need anything else. So, I'll support that.

Gingrich is a DC butt boy. He's a serial cheater (not that I would not vote for him because of it but it speaks of his - lack of - character), he's a serial liar (I never vote for someone who habitually lies), he's morally bankrupt, holds ethics in contempt, he's a self serving, corrupt, SOB. I won't vote for him.... and more than that... I don't think independents will vote for him. And that means the GOP loses. They cannot win without the independents.

Sooo, ummm, if you aren't going to judge him by his adultery, why do you mention it at every oppurtunity?

Romney's biggest liablity is that he's a douchebag who got rich screwing working people out of good paying jobs and replacing them with McJobs. No one is going to like him or reward him for that. Bain is Romney's Swift-Boat.

Oh, yeah, and he belongs to a batshit crazy religion that 18% of Republicans and 19% of Independents won't vote for.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I dont want to see Christy as a vp pick

Not going to happen, he’s saving himself or 2016, after Obama’s second term, when a GOP victory is all but assured.

 

[Missourian]

I've pretty clearly stated why Romney is not a compromise too far. You may not get it but it's based on his experience. Gringrich is, in my opinion, unfit for the Office of President. He is a serial liar, DC insider, convicted of ethics violations, and generally a morally bankrupt self serving, corrupt asshole. I have always maintained that I will not vote for those people. And I stand by that.

And.... I'm quietly confident that I'm not the only independent who views it that way. Hence, Romney shows much stronger than any other candidate on the right with Independents. Independents are independent for a reason.... mainly because of a general distrust and dislike of either sides assholes.

Romney fits that description nicely as well.

He was for abortion, gun control, cap/trade and universal healthcare...but now he is pro-life, a member of the NRA, opposed to cap/trade and opposes to universal healthcare.

Was he lying then, or is he lying now?

Romney is the Republican establishment candidate! How much more "insider" can you get?

All the Republican candidates are flawed.

If Romney gets the nomination, I'll support him.

If Gingrich gets the nomination, I'll support him.

Both have their strengths and weaknesses.

But when push comes to shove...I believe Gingrich will do what he says he will do.

I cannot say the same about Romney.

In the primary...that tilts the scale to Gingrich...warts and all.

You seem to think that I'm a huge fan of Romney. I'm not. But the more I see of him, the more comfortable I am with him. Frankly, I'm not overly worried about shifting position on social issues. I don't care what his stance is on abortion. I'm pro-life... but I accept that I don't have the right to inflict my view on others. That ain't flip flopping... it's called a commitment to liberty.... even when it is personally difficult.

Romney's biggest asset is his real work, honest to God, experience in business. He understands business, and economics.... and, right now, we need that more than we need anything else. So, I'll support that.

<addressed in a separate post>

Romney, supported by his CEO businessman, Governor, Nixon Cabinet Member, presidential candidate father George Romney?

He's the shining star of business acumen?

I mean, when he had every possible advantage...is it a surprise that he succeeded?

Now, had Romney started at the bottom and worked his way to the top, pulled himself up by his bootstraps, and was a huge success, you might have a point.

But what has Romney, Jr really done on his own?

Romney is as far removed from main street as Obama.

 

[MikeK]

That's not my point. I can't put my finger on it exactly but he just doesn't strike me as the conservative he portrays himself as. Granted I'm in middle America so I only hear dribs and drabs of what he's doing. I want to see some results.

What you're describing is a signal from what probably is good political instinct. Christie's obviously gluttonous nature combined with his aggressive political ambition suggests an aristocratic disposition. That characteristic appeals to the authoritarian submissive personality of most political conservatives -- such as those who remain enamored with George W. Bush in spite of what the rapacious egomaniac did to this Nation.

So where Christie is concerned I suggest you follow your nose.

 

[whitehall]

There is absolutely no doubt that Christie is a fiscal conservative. If a republican can manage to get elected in N.J. and turn the crooked state around he is a strong leader. So what if he is fat. He is probably stronger on conservative social issues than McCain was (is).

 

[Missourian]

Gingrich is a DC butt boy. He's a serial cheater (not that I would not vote for him because of it but it speaks of his - lack of - character), he's a serial liar (I never vote for someone who habitually lies), he's morally bankrupt, holds ethics in contempt, he's a self serving, corrupt, SOB. I won't vote for him.... and more than that... I don't think independents will vote for him. And that means the GOP loses. They cannot win without the independents.

I don't think either Romney or Gingrich are true conservatives...but I think Gingrich is closer by a wide margin than Romney.

Gingrich has passion. I wouldn't trust him with my wife, but I trust him to be true to his conviction.

I'd trust Romney with my wife, but NOT to be true to his conviction, if he has any, which I couldn't possibly conclude by his positions on every side of every issue.

Which is more important in a president?