When Romney wins the nomonation what will those of you on the right that h8 em do?

[The T]

Yet, they keep pretending it can happen..and every year they say "Ok, ****...I'll pick that guy!" Support him until he leaves then call him a liberal.

Rinse, wash and repeat

We have to vote for the guy that can win even through may not be perfect. Winning is everything within politics and if we can force the country to the right then maybe we will have a chance at electing someone better.

If he gets the nomination....the GOP will "come home", think of England and vote for Romney en mass. The wildcard is what does Perry and Gingrich do? Do they go quietly or try to go third party. It would certainly be in the interest of Mr. Romney to reach out to the two and see about bringing them into the tent. It's hard to do that when they are slinging arrows at you but there is ample reward for doing so. A third party candidate that gets 5 percent of the vote can sew it up for Mr. Obama.

Now that being said, Romney and the GOP have an uphill fight on their hands already. With his numbers being almost identical to his 2008 numbers, Romney has to get nearly every one of the votes his current competitors will be giving up.

Can he do it? I don't think so. This is the big Achilles heel of the GOP. They talk about their convictions, their character, their spine blah blah blah....then when it comes down to it....they sacrifice those convictions and character to make the politically appetizing choice. Or at least appear to be ready to do just that.

I think we can see why the plurality of voters considers themselves independents now. The major parties seem to be for winning but beyond that, their core values become quite murky.

Romney is a Corporitist...as is Gingrich...Both fight one another for position as to which is the larger one.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Romney has been the front runner for some time now and apparently Newt has lit a fire in your collective asses. So when he wins what do you do then? If Romney is to liberal for you will you just sit it out and LET Obama, who is ten times further to the left, have another term?

Many say we only got one shot to repeal O'care so does that even matter to you?

He isn't my first choice but by god he is miles ahead on the list as compared to Obama.

I liked in one way or another the entire Republican field of candidates.

I want America to do well in business, to pay off the national debt, to restart manufacturing, and to treat each person with dignity and respect.

We have some problems that will never get us there until we solve them, no matter who is in office, and the only people I see who could heal the rift minister in churches.

Unfortunately, we have a lot of people who do not go to church, do not feel it's important to stay in touch with older parents, and are caught up in behaviors that have never benefited people in the long run.

Politicians simply are not acknowledge the people they are supposed to represent by lying, blaming, withholding information, and have the nation in a moral free fall.

I don't like people usurping power to enrich themselves in monumental ways. We have people in precincts who are denying the nation of correctly and honestly counting submitted votes and are opening the vote to non-citizens.

I really don't know what to do about the sinister, cheating nature of the nation's polling places.

That's where the lying gets validated, and I'm finding it difficult to support liars and cheaters cheating the American people out of truthfulness at the polls.

The way we're going, it will not end well.

Our polling places do not have a sinister, cheating nature. You are just planting the seeds for your November excuse crop.

 

[JoeB131]

Point 1- Romney isn't going to repeal ObamaCare, it was his idea. the best chance we have of dismantling it will be in the courts.

Point 2- Obama's ability to do damage will be limited by a GOP House and GOP senate (unless ROmney proves so unpopular that he drags down everyone lower on the ticket, which I don't completely discount.) Romney will obligate the GOP In congress to do along with some of his liberal schemes.

Point 3- My objection to ROmney isn't idealogical as much as it is moral. I think Obama is a poor leader and an ineffective president, but he's at his core a decent man. Romney, on the other hand is a real scumbag as a human being. Liar. Flip-flopper. Corporate Vulture. oh, yeah, and he belongs to a batshit crazy religion.

So, yeah, I'd have no problem sitting it out or voting third party to vent my anger.

In fact, voting third party would kind of like voting "Present". You could have had my vote, but didn't get it.

Well said. That pretty much sums it up for me.

Except Romney is on the record as saying he will repeal ObamaCare. So JoeyB is bullshitting.

His real issue with Romney is an irrational hatred of his religious beliefs. I find that a pathetic 'reason' to dislike a candidate.

If his post 'sums' it up for you, then you are probably as dumb as he is. And I don't think you are. I could, naturally, be wrong.

Romney is on record for a lot of things. He's been on two sides of every issue. But if he's changed his mind on abortion or ObamaCare (which they used to call "RomneyCare", so is he just upset about trademark infringment?) in the past, whose to say he won't change it again.

 

[JoeB131]

Hmm. You make a compelling point. I didn't realize you were so passionate about employers who screw workers out of money.

Did he? or are you taking the medias' word for it?

Well, Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act which strengthens employees' protections against employers who illegal under pay them. You guys are crying about all the damage Obama has done. So, it makes sense then that you think the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act is damaging and you side with employers who illegally under pay.

Why?

Maybe because Lily Ledbetter was a useless employee?

Here's the thing, though. Most companies keep what they pay their employees a deep dark dirty secret. You can be fired for telling a co-worker what you make at my company.

The thing is, pay isn't always based on performance, it's based on what the employer thinks he can get away with.

Someone hired in 2006, when unemployment was at 5% is going to be in a stronger negotiating position than someone hired in 2002 or 2009 was.

Now, if you had complete transparancy in wages, employers would have to justify what they pay people. Yes, I'm paying Sally more, but that's because she's been here for ten years and she's fluent in Mandarin. Oh, I'm also paying Bob more because I golf with him and he got hired in 2006. Oh, wait, I know he's a useless slug and half your day is spent fixing his mistakes.

Not saying this is ideal, just throwing it out there.

 

[California Girl]

Well said. That pretty much sums it up for me.

Except Romney is on the record as saying he will repeal ObamaCare. So JoeyB is bullshitting.

His real issue with Romney is an irrational hatred of his religious beliefs. I find that a pathetic 'reason' to dislike a candidate.

If his post 'sums' it up for you, then you are probably as dumb as he is. And I don't think you are. I could, naturally, be wrong.

Romney is on record for a lot of things. He's been on two sides of every issue. But if he's changed his mind on abortion or ObamaCare (which they used to call "RomneyCare", so is he just upset about trademark infringment?) in the past, whose to say he won't change it again.

Abortion is not a federal government issue.

They didn't call it 'RomneyCare'... but I have no issue with a Governor of a state overseeing the implementation of a state health care system - if that is what the people of that state desire. Their business - not ours.

Is Romney my ideal candidate? Hell no. But he is the best of the bunch, and right now, with the country struggling through some horrific economic problems, I support someone with the business experience to stabilize the economy in order for Americans to work our way out of it.

Your problem, again, is that you are so wrapped up in the blanket of hate for Romney that you have lost touch with reality.

 

[JoeB131]

Romney is on record for a lot of things. He's been on two sides of every issue. But if he's changed his mind on abortion or ObamaCare (which they used to call "RomneyCare", so is he just upset about trademark infringment?) in the past, whose to say he won't change it again.

Abortion is not a federal government issue.

You miss the point again. It isn't what his ACTUALY position is, it is that he takes two sides of every issue. He was pro-abortion when he was running in MA because it was a pro-choice state. But when he started running for the GOP nomination, he decided he was against abortion. In short, it was about politics, not principles.

I don't think abortion will ever be outlawed nor should it. My contempt for the man comes from the fact that he's lying about what he actually believes. If he believes anything.

They didn't call it 'RomneyCare'... but I have no issue with a Governor of a state overseeing the implementation of a state health care system - if that is what the people of that state desire. Their business - not ours.

I don't see the difference between the state government or federal government MANDATING people buy a product they don't want or need. It's really a distinction without a difference.

The problem with Obama/RomneyCare was that it's main goal was to reward big insurance by giving them a fat windfall (extra customers) in exchange for not engaging in certain behaviors (denying coverage for pre-existing conditions). It doesn't fix the underlying problem, that health care is spiralling out of control with costs.

Is Romney my ideal candidate? Hell no. But he is the best of the bunch, and right now, with the country struggling through some horrific economic problems, I support someone with the business experience to stabilize the economy in order for Americans to work our way out of it.

Americans aren't going to work their way out of it if we keep letting big corporations put the screws to us. That's how we got into the mess to start with.

Your problem, again, is that you are so wrapped up in the blanket of hate for Romney that you have lost touch with reality.

No, I hate the man for specific reasons. That he is an unethical person. That he has no empathy for people like me. And yes, part of that is his religion, which was started by a two bit con man and has been kind of a con for 160 years. Every once in a while he slips and shows us who he really is, but you just refuse to look.

 

[Mac1958]

Romney's three big issues are already out there: RomneyCare (and the fact that he's now somehow so against ObamaCare), Bain (and the fact that this is sure as hell not a good time to be a banker or financier) and his clear willingness to say freakin' anything at any given freakin' time to satisfy any given freakin' audience.

None of those are small issues. Indeed, Obama is damaged and vulnerable, but that just means that the choice will be between TWO damaged and vulnerable candidates. The economy is beginning to improve, and Republicans who are already doing a victory lap are in serious denial right now.

.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A third party run gives us Obama for a surety unless the campaign gets tossed into the House, which means, if it is GOP (most likely), the winner will be Romney.

So . . . vote Romney.

 

[Seawytch]

When Romney wins the nomonation what will those of you on the right that h8 em do?

Don't worry Gramps, everyone will fall in their proper line behind Willard. Fox is already steering that way and so is the GOP leader, Rush Limbaugh. Of course, how much Limbaugh support is because Romney owns his radio station...

They'll all hold their noses (again) and pull the lever for the establishment candidate. It's not the right you have to worry about, but those "independents".

There probably won't be a third party candidate out of the current crop. Paul isn't going to do it because it would hurt his son politically. The only one that might is Newt. Oh, now THAT would be delightful...

Of course, there is always the Americans Elect candidate...I hear they are trying to get Jeb.

 

[JoeB131]

A third party run gives us Obama for a surety unless the campaign gets tossed into the House, which means, if it is GOP (most likely), the winner will be Romney.

So . . . vote Romney.

Actually, all a third party does is increase Obama's victory margin.

Because there aren't any states Obama took last time Romney has a reasonable chance of taking back once Obama unleashes the 1 Billion dollar buzzsaw on his record.

 

[Liability]

Don'tBeEvenMarginallyIntelligent would be a better name for that ass clown.

What a tool.

Hmm. You make a compelling point. I didn't realize you were so passionate about employers who screw workers out of money.

Hm. You remain pointless. My comment was about you, dipshit. It had nothing to do with your class-warfare idiotic mindless trite rhetoric.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

But you're not voting for a candidate that has a chance either, so in effect' you are throwing away your vote and giving the worst candidate a better chance of ******* up the country.

Again, no I'm not. If I don't vote I'm giving every candidate, even the third party candidates, an equal shot. It's up to the rest of you brainwashed morons who believe in the two party system to decide who gets elected.

And Obama and Romney are both the worst candidate who will **** the country, great choice you got there.

I'll admit that sometimes voting is like choosing to be shot or stabbed, but Geeze you must have a preference between Romney and whatz his name.

They are both equal in my eyes. But, I only look at the important issues, not the distraction issues.

Immigration - same
Federal Reserve - same
Free Trade - same
War on drugs - same
Revising our tax code - same
Deficit - same
Big government, big spending - same
Stripping away freedoms - same

So tell me again why I should give a shit which one wins?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Again, no I'm not. If I don't vote I'm giving every candidate, even the third party candidates, an equal shot. It's up to the rest of you brainwashed morons who believe in the two party system to decide who gets elected.

And Obama and Romney are both the worst candidate who will **** the country, great choice you got there.

I'll admit that sometimes voting is like choosing to be shot or stabbed, but Geeze you must have a preference between Romney and whatz his name.

They are both equal in my eyes. But, I only look at the important issues, not the distraction issues.

Immigration - same
Federal Reserve - same
Free Trade - same
War on drugs - same
Revising our tax code - same
Deficit - same
Big government, big spending - same
Stripping away freedoms - same

So tell me again why I should give a shit which one wins?

You shouldn't. And you should stop posting on here.

After all your bitching is just like everyone else's.

Now stfu and give it a rest.

 

[syrenn]

Romney has been the front runner for some time now and apparently Newt has lit a fire in your collective asses. So when he wins what do you do then? If Romney is to liberal for you will you just sit it out and LET Obama, who is ten times further to the left, have another term?

Many say we only got one shot to repeal O'care so does that even matter to you?

He isn't my first choice but by god he is miles ahead on the list as compared to Obama.

Point 1- Romney isn't going to repeal ObamaCare, it was his idea. the best chance we have of dismantling it will be in the courts.

Point 2- Obama's ability to do damage will be limited by a GOP House and GOP senate (unless ROmney proves so unpopular that he drags down everyone lower on the ticket, which I don't completely discount.) Romney will obligate the GOP In congress to do along with some of his liberal schemes.

Point 3- My objection to ROmney isn't idealogical as much as it is moral. I think Obama is a poor leader and an ineffective president, but he's at his core a decent man. Romney, on the other hand is a real scumbag as a human being. Liar. Flip-flopper. Corporate Vulture. oh, yeah, and he belongs to a batshit crazy religion.

So, yeah, I'd have no problem sitting it out or voting third party to vent my anger.

In fact, voting third party would kind of like voting "Present". You could have had my vote, but didn't get it.

Fine. Don't vote him. I will - and that is a damned sight more than I would say about most of the field. So they lose your vote, and gain mine... and since there are millions of independents across this country, we will have to wait and see whether there are more that think like I do... or more than don't think at all - like you.

As with a good deal of votes.... a vote "for" is not so much a vote becasue you want them to win... but a vote "against" so the others ass will NOT win. I think a good deal of the voting will go this way.

 

[JoeB131]

As with a good deal of votes.... a vote "for" is not so much a vote becasue you want them to win... but a vote "against" so the others ass will NOT win. I think a good deal of the voting will go this way.

If voting against someone was good enough to get them out, BUsh-43 would have been a one term president like his dad.

The Democrats were very motivated to get him out. So they voted for a guy who seemed "electable" with a narrative that looked great if no one looked at it too closely.

Sound familiar?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Not very many Paul supporters can articulate why they want to dismantle the fed. They have taken simple to a new level.

 

[NoNukes]

Romney has been the front runner for some time now and apparently Newt has lit a fire in your collective asses. So when he wins what do you do then? If Romney is to liberal for you will you just sit it out and LET Obama, who is ten times further to the left, have another term?

Many say we only got one shot to repeal O'care so does that even matter to you?

He isn't my first choice but by god he is miles ahead on the list as compared to Obama.

IF.

If Mitt gets the nod, I will be FORCED -- compelled even -- to make a choice.

Cast my vote to Re-elect President Obama or vote for his opponent?

Hm.

Now there's a real poser!

You can always do a write in vote, but you will do a right in vote, pull the lever, goodnight.

 

[dblack]

I'll admit that sometimes voting is like choosing to be shot or stabbed, but Geeze you must have a preference between Romney and whatz his name.

They are both equal in my eyes. But, I only look at the important issues, not the distraction issues.

Immigration - same
Federal Reserve - same
Free Trade - same
War on drugs - same
Revising our tax code - same
Deficit - same
Big government, big spending - same
Stripping away freedoms - same

So tell me again why I should give a shit which one wins?

You shouldn't. And you should stop posting on here.

After all your bitching is just like everyone else's.

Now stfu and give it a rest.

Indeed. What Grampa said! You're spoiling the puppet show for everyone else. If YOU want to look behind the curtain, fine. But you have no right to ruin it for the rest of us.

Now back to our regularly scheduled, shallow and pointless, partisan pissing match...

 

[NoNukes]

As with a good deal of votes.... a vote "for" is not so much a vote becasue you want them to win... but a vote "against" so the others ass will NOT win. I think a good deal of the voting will go this way.

If voting against someone was good enough to get them out, BUsh-43 would have been a one term president like his dad.

The Democrats were very motivated to get him out. So they voted for a guy who seemed "electable" with a narrative that looked great if no one looked at it too closely.

Sound familiar?

I have been saying for quite a while that the Republicans are in the same position of the Democrats in 2004. There is a seated President who is beatable, but their candidates are too weak.

 

[JoeB131]

As with a good deal of votes.... a vote "for" is not so much a vote becasue you want them to win... but a vote "against" so the others ass will NOT win. I think a good deal of the voting will go this way.

If voting against someone was good enough to get them out, BUsh-43 would have been a one term president like his dad.

The Democrats were very motivated to get him out. So they voted for a guy who seemed "electable" with a narrative that looked great if no one looked at it too closely.

Sound familiar?

I have been saying for quite a while that the Republicans are in the same position of the Democrats in 2004. There is a seated President who is beatable, but their candidates are too weak.

I think it's more than that. I think the thing that animates the right is hatred of Obama, much like hatred of Bush animated the left in 2004.

In both cases, they voted for a guy from Mass. who was "electable", and had voted for something they hate (Iraq or RomneyCare), but they thought he had the best chance, so they put their priniciples off to the side and backed him anyway.

They both thought they had a narrative that fit the time (War Veteran or Financial Genius) as long as no one looked too closely (VVAW or Bain).

But in both cases, they ignored people who were more idealogically in tune with what they want. In short, they didn't make it a war on idealogy or ideas. They made it about personality.

And the final component. An improving economy solidifying the incumbants position.