Not trying to start any wars, just asking for honest opinions.
Does anyone here think that Mitt Romney would make a good President?
|by Anonymous||reply 107||11/06/2012|
Just the fact that he disappeared during the "debt ceiling" nightmare and only come out after the fact to trash the deal, shows what kind of a person he is...
The ONLY Republican candidate I would even consider voting for would be Jon Huntsman.
But I won't, I will be voting for Obama, again.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||08/06/2011|
1. Daddy's boy
2. puppet of a hideous cult
3. puppet of secretive industry.
4. million dollar mystery donors.
5. greasy hair
7. did i mention Mor(m)on?
10. lying flipflopping hypocritical rightwing puppet cult member.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||08/06/2011|
If he's elected, Mormons will be even more emboldened in their campaign against gay people. That and I think he's fake.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||08/06/2011|
Two words: magic underwear.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||08/06/2011|
He was born in to privilege and despite that, he has no backbone - he takes whatever position he's told by the behind-the-scenes Republican leadership. No good would come of a Romney presidency.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||08/06/2011|
The economy is in the toilet, and the American public thinks he can do a better job turning things around than Obama.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||08/06/2011|
Romney would kind of be like Ronald Reagan without the Alzheimer's.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||08/06/2011|
|by Anonymous||reply 8||08/06/2011|
|by Anonymous||reply 9||08/06/2011|
|by Anonymous||reply 10||08/06/2011|
Did not vote for him when he ran for Senator nor for Governor.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||08/06/2011|
No. And not Huntsman, either. No.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||08/06/2011|
He's going to legalize polygamy with children! He's going to legalize child rape!
|by Anonymous||reply 13||08/06/2011|
|by Anonymous||reply 14||08/06/2011|
"the American public thinks"
that's only part of your stupid post.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||08/06/2011|
As a Massachusetts resident, who lived through his "administration" as Governor, I can say from first-hand experience, that NO, he would NOT make a good President......
|by Anonymous||reply 16||08/06/2011|
Even if you're a Republican - he has no spine and would do whatever the worst whackjobs in the Tea Party wanted him to pull if that was what he thought he needed to get re-elected
|by Anonymous||reply 17||08/06/2011|
What is interesting is that his father--who also ran for the Republican nomination in 1968--was one of the Republican "moderates" who had an appeal to independents and liberals in MI in the 60's. The father actually accomplished something; however, the son is all bells and whistles. The health care in MA was actually the work of the Democrats and Romney signed on since he knew what would happen if he did not (defeat). You also have the Olympics, which is a subject that the media fails to look at more closely.%0D %0D What I love is that Bachman and Paul will finish strong in IA and that will throw the GOP into a frenzy. Lol. The punishment fits the crime.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||08/06/2011|
Are you NUTS??
|by Anonymous||reply 19||08/06/2011|
No, he's just another fortunate son who feels entitled to take a turn being president.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||08/06/2011|
Would I vote for him over Obama? Good God, no. Do I think he's the best of a terrible GOP bunch? Most certainly. Do I think he'd do a decent job running the country? Assuming he quit it with the desperate flip-flopping and returned to the policy stances he held as MA governor -- pro-HCR, pro-choice, etc. -- then yes. He's a smart businessman, which at this particular time of economic crises and near-certainty of a double-dlp recession would be an asset in the Oval Office (again, once he stopped with the ridiculous postering of trying to blame the economy or debt-ceiling deal on Obama - keep in mind here that he turned MA's deficit around while in office), and me not being a bigot, unlike many DLers, I don't give a flying fuck if he's a Mormon -- and yes, I am well-aware of the church's stance on homosexuality. (Do you bitches think Kennedy was a terrible president simply because he was Catholic?) Unlike many GOP presidential hopefuls, Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry topping the list, he doesn't wear his religion faux-piously on his sleeve, which is a very, *very* good thing.
Also, as for R5's comment about him being born into privilege: while true, privilege only goes so far, and you don't get a dual MBA/JD from Harvard and become CEO of one of the country's most prominent private equity firms just because your dad was in Nixon's cabinet. (Btw he was a Baker Scholar at HBS, finishing in the top 5% of his class, which he managed while simultaneously going to law school and raising two young kids.)
|by Anonymous||reply 21||08/06/2011|
Would you vote for anyone believing the truth of this (in most civilized countries people like that would be institutionalized)?
|by Anonymous||reply 22||08/06/2011|
Though he would never get my vote, he would know how to control the Rethuglicans in Congress and wouldn't sit around for a year while waiting for a consensus with the Democrats. He would have enough smarts to never expect help from Democrats. I doubt if he'll get the Pubbie nomination. The Religious Reich won't support anyone in the Mormon cult.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||08/06/2011|
He's from Massachusetts and was for healthcare for all in that state. I'm pretty sure he won't try to repeal healthcare which makes him my fav republican.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||08/06/2011|
[quote](Do you bitches think Kennedy was a terrible president simply because he was Catholic?)
Funny, R21 but I don't recall any Catholic interference with our fledgling rights back in the 60s and I certainly don't recall any Catholic backing of denial of our rights.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||08/06/2011|
R22, I don't think the Book of Mormon is any more or less a ridiculous fairy tale than the Old Testament. (And it makes for a *fabulous* musical!)
|by Anonymous||reply 26||08/06/2011|
Funny, R25, I don't recall the Mormon church having a BILLION members who follow every single dictum of an extreme-right-wing ex-Nazi who doesn't appear to have much of an issue with choir-boy molestation.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||08/06/2011|
[quote]Funny, [R25], I don't recall the Mormon church having a BILLION members who follow every single dictum of an extreme-right-wing ex-Nazi who doesn't appear to have much of an issue with choir-boy molestation.
Are you excusing the Mormon church's involvement in Prop 8 R27?
They didn't NEED a billion members to show hate and prejudice.
It was there front and center.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||08/06/2011|
I thinks he's gorgeous and lovely eye candy, total dilf. But I will never vote for him in a million years.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||08/06/2011|
I would never vote for him, but can I watch him get it on with Scott Brown?
|by Anonymous||reply 30||08/06/2011|
Trollin', trollin', trollin'
|by Anonymous||reply 31||08/06/2011|
A good president? No. But he would be an OK president. And an OK president is better than the current one. So he may end up with my vote if there's no other choice.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||08/06/2011|
R30 you and me fantasize alike.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||08/06/2011|
I'm with r21. I will vote for Obama, but Romney would make a much better president than McCain would have.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||08/06/2011|
[quote]Are you excusing the Mormon church's involvement in Prop 8 R27?
No, but I wouldn't hold Mitt Romney personally accountable for it any more than I would hold a Catholic individually accountable for noxious thing Pope Benedict states. And while Catholics may not have played an active role in fighting against gay rights back in the '60s, particularly considering that the concept basically didn't exist pre-Stonewall given how hidden gay life was at the time, they sure as shit do now -- and Catholics have A LOT more power, both domestically and globally, than the Mormon church, even if Mormons happened to play a greater role in the Prop 8 vote.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||08/06/2011|
R27 does the term "faith based initiative" ring a bell?
Bush brought that into his administration and I firmly believe that Romney would bring in something just like it if he gets into the White House.
Obama's a christian but he's not walking around wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross like Bush did.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||08/06/2011|
[quote]Catholics have A LOT more power, both domestically and globally, than the Mormon church,%0D %0D Heh! Tell that to the people in Spain who totally ignored the Pope's message to not legalize gay marriage.%0D %0D Tell that the the people of Malta who recently approved divorce and told the Pope to shove it!
|by Anonymous||reply 37||08/06/2011|
|by Anonymous||reply 38||08/06/2011|
After what he did to his Irish Setter, I don't want him making any kind of decisions. %0D %0D Dumb-ass bastard.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||08/06/2011|
[quote]Bush brought that into his administration and I firmly believe that Romney would bring in something just like it if he gets into the White House.
Are you kidding? He's trying to avoid the subject of his religion like the fucking plague! Like I said earlier, one of things I appreciate about Romney is that he DOESN'T act like a Bachmann or Perry (or Bush) when it comes to religion.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||08/06/2011|
[quote]Tell that to the people in Spain who totally ignored the Pope's message to not legalize gay marriage.
You're trying to use this argument against the man who was governor of Massachusetts when it legalized gay marriage?
|by Anonymous||reply 41||08/06/2011|
[quote]Are you kidding? He's trying to avoid the subject of his religion like the fucking plague! Like I said earlier, one of things I appreciate about Romney is that he DOESN'T act like a Bachmann or Perry (or Bush) when it comes to religion.
Yeah. Till he gets into office.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||08/06/2011|
[quote]Yeah. Till he gets into office.
Um, yeah, I'm sure he'd gain LOTS of positive attention highlighting his Mormonism, and it'd be SURE to make his re-election prospects golden!
|by Anonymous||reply 43||08/06/2011|
Mitt was trashing Obama over the S&P downgrade last night. Romney has done NOTHING of note and had nothing to say when everything was happening and now he thinks he can step in and start shit. He's a NOTHING.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||08/06/2011|
I suppose anything is possible, OP, but the question I have is why does making oneself wealthy in the private sector automatically give him the belief that it makes him an expert on how to manage the world's biggest economy?
|by Anonymous||reply 45||08/06/2011|
[quote]and it'd be SURE to make his re-election prospects golden
Re-election? You're projecting to 2016? Can you even imagine how much damage that man could do in four years to us 2012-2016? Four years of that oppressive cult mindset and this country won't exist in 2016.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||08/06/2011|
...BOMBSHELL, C. Everett Koop is jerking off on Cam4 right now, really. ...will some start a thread for me? tia. fwiw, his profile states he's bi.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||08/06/2011|
[quote]Romney has done NOTHING of note
You mean aside from turning around Bain Consulting during a time of crisis, launching and running Bain Capital (which now manages $65 billion in assets), and presiding over the Massachusetts state government when it both legalized gay marriage AND passed universal health care? As the noxious George W. Bush would say: that dog don't hunt. If you want to pick on a talentless Rethuglican, try Rick Perry (the Texas governor's seat is a largely honorary role with about as much actual legislative power as the British monarchy; the lieutenant governor holds all the real power there) or Michele Bachmann, undistinguished low-ranking House representative who calls global warming a hoax, believes you can "pray away the gay" and hasn't gotten a single piece of substantive legislation passed.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||08/06/2011|
[quote]You're trying to use this argument against the man who was governor of Massachusetts when it legalized gay marriage?%0D %0D %0D No Dummy. I'm replying to the idiot @ r35 who thinks the Catholic Church has power over the thinking and attitudes of the members of that Church. The Mormons are rolling in dough while Catholic parishes are shutting down all around the globe. Were you unable to comprehend the quote in the box r41?
|by Anonymous||reply 49||08/06/2011|
[quote]The Mormons are rolling in dough while Catholic parishes are shutting down all around the globe.
Oh, please. Most Mormons aren't "rolling in dough." That's about as ridiculous (and prejudiced) as arguing that "all Jews are rich" simply because they happen to have a small clique of wealthy donors with enough political clout to dominate our stance on Israel.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||08/06/2011|
[quote]The Mormons are rolling in dough while Catholic parishes are shutting down all around the globe.%0D %0D You're kidding I hope. The Catholic Church's wealth makes the Mormons look like paupers.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||08/06/2011|
His record in Massachusetts was, to put it charitably, less than impressive. And given the drivel he's been babbling on the campaign trail, no, I don't think he would make a good President. And that's not even counting things like the Supreme Court.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||08/06/2011|
[quote]The Mormons are rolling in dough while Catholic parishes are shutting down all around the globe.
That's because the Mormon church built itself as a business from the outset and always puts money first. Ever see a Mormon church run elementary or high school in the US? Of course not. They're not profitable. The Catholics haven't figured this out yet.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||08/06/2011|
Americans love white daddy figures who come from money, so on that alone Romney has a chance.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||08/06/2011|
R21, 41, 43, 50, etc, basically the resident GOProud on this thread, thanks for proving the truth that a duplicitous gay republican can't get through the day without a lot of pointless rationalizations.
Do you also use Brylcreem like your Romulan?
|by Anonymous||reply 55||08/06/2011|
[quote]Americans love white daddy figures who come from money, so on that alone Romney has a chance.
If that's true, then Romney is sure to be defeated by Jon Huntsman, who was born and raised into one of the wealthiest families in America (and I believe the single-wealthiest Mormon family - the Huntsmans are worth billions and own half of Utah). Hell, their compound in Park City alone recently sold for close to $100 million, owing to its unparalleled size -- "only" 60 acres, but that's an awful lot in an area where half-acre lots routinely sell for a mil and up -- and proximity to the Deer Valley ski resort.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||08/06/2011|
[quote]R21. 41, 43, 50, etc, basically the resident GOProud on this thread
Ha! You bitches really are deluded sometimes. The only Republican I've EVER voted for was Bloomberg for mayor (before he went independent, of course). My presidential voting record is 100% Democratic: Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama. Sorry if I actually take the time to *research* the opposition, even if what I find doesn't fit with your wishful-thinking belief that all Republicans are idiotic rich kids (Bush) or cunts (Palin) from oil-loving states. In this case, it just so happens that the two least odious, as well as accomplished, GOP candidates for next year's election are both Mormons -- one of whom was nominated as our ambassador to China, arguably the most important ambassadorship of all in today's world, by none other than President Obama himself.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||08/06/2011|
The answer to your question is NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|by Anonymous||reply 58||08/06/2011|
R57, so why didn't you "research" Romney's former time in office, particularly when it came to economic issues and jobs, his supposed strength? Or check with Massachusetts residents to see if they actually want him back? Or "research" what Romney has been claiming and promising on the campaign trail, almost all of which has been false, idiotic, or both.
As for Huntsman, he actually does have a decent record but he's proving to be a lousy campaigner. Romney is killing him even in Huntsman's home state of Utah. And Huntsman is off to a rotten start, totally flubbing the announcement that he was running, unable to control the fights and defections amongst his campaign staff, little money coming in, and no traction in the polls.
And both Huntsman and Romney have totally abandoned their supposed centrist credentials to become babbling Tea Partyists.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||08/06/2011|
R40 has a point. Romney may be LESS likely than Bush to bring religion into the White House because he would be afraid of people accusing him of being a puppet for the Mormon Church. He would not want to risk defeat by coming across as too religious.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||08/06/2011|
57 (etc, prevous), clicking on your posts - every other one on this thread, almost, proves a sea of yellow from your busy little stubby hands.
You post a lot of positive things and dismissive blather about any criticism of someone you claim to never support.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||08/06/2011|
" the man who was governor of Massachusetts when it legalized gay marriage?"
What the fuck did he have to do with it?
|by Anonymous||reply 62||08/06/2011|
[quote]R57, so why didn't you "research" Romney's former time in office, particularly when it came to economic issues and jobs, his supposed strength?
Um, I did. The man's not perfect, and I certainly never appreciated his efforts to deride same-sex marriage even after it became law in MA, but as a whole his record's a hell of a lot stronger than that of nearly everyone else gunning for the GOP nomination.
[quote]Or check with Massachusetts residents to see if they actually want him back?
The same ones who picked a Republican to fill Ted Kennedy's seat, eliminating the Democrats' supermajority in the Senate in the process? I'll pass, thanks.
[quote]Or "research" what Romney has been claiming and promising on the campaign trail, almost all of which has been false, idiotic, or both.
Did you miss the part in my original comment on this thread (R21) where I specifically called Romney out on his "desperate flip-flopping" and "ridiculous posturing" on the campaign trail?
|by Anonymous||reply 63||08/06/2011|
"the man who was governor of Massachusetts when it legalized gay marriage"
Which he opposed and tried to stop!
|by Anonymous||reply 64||08/06/2011|
There is absolutely no way he could be president without Mormons covering DC like algae on river rocks. Those motherfuckers are a systemic cancer.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||08/06/2011|
|by Anonymous||reply 66||08/06/2011|
R66 = Sen. Lindsey Graham
|by Anonymous||reply 67||08/06/2011|
OP,%0D %0D You should use your own imagination. %0D %0D It won't be the reality.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||08/06/2011|
[quote]Um, I did.
Really? So what's his record on jobs and the economy? Strange that with all this "research" and all your posts on this thread, you've not really provided any information on that. It seems to me to be relevant, giving that you're claiming he's a "smart businessman" who would be an "asset" in times of "economic crises and near-certainty of a double-dip recession." How did he do in Massachusetts? How many jobs did he create? What effect would the policies he's advocating today have on the economy?
[quote]The man's not perfect, and I certainly never appreciated his efforts to deride same-sex marriage even after it became law
So why did you give him credit for the fact that that law passed while he was governor?
[quote]but as a whole his record's a hell of a lot stronger than that of nearly everyone else gunning for the GOP nomination.
Talk about damning with faint praise...
[quote]The same ones who picked a Republican to fill Ted Kennedy's seat, eliminating the Democrats' supermajority in the Senate in the process? I'll pass, thanks.
LOL... Talk about a pathetic attempt to change the subject. You just can't bring yourself to admit that he was a lousy governor who'd make a lousy President. Why is that?
|by Anonymous||reply 69||08/07/2011|
Yes. If the prospect of being rounded up into a "re-education" camp gets you off OP
|by Anonymous||reply 70||08/07/2011|
[quote]So what's his record on jobs and the economy?
The MA economy improved dramatically during his tenure -- but, then, so did the rest of the U.S., so one can't necessarily attribute that to Romney. He did, however, successfully eliminate the state's projected $3 billion budget deficit shortly after his election, through a combination of cuts and tax increases (albeit in the form of "fees"), and he led the effort to turn around Boston's Big Dig project after its infamous ceiling collapse accident. Please tell me you're not trying to assail his business record, considering he rose through the ranks over 20 years at Bain and ultimately not only became its CEO, but also launched an entire spinoff division on his own. The *only* other prominent Republican politician in the country with more solid of an actual CEO background is Mike Bloomberg.
[quote]So why did you give him credit for the fact that that law passed while he was governor?
I misspoke. I apologize.
[quote]LOL... Talk about a pathetic attempt to change the subject. You just can't bring yourself to admit that he was a lousy governor who'd make a lousy President. Why is that?
Because he wasn't a lousy governor, by any rational, unbiased standpoint, and most likely wouldn't be a lousy president. My point was that the people of Massachusetts are clearly rather capricious in their opinions. The fact that they wouldn't re-elect Romney now -- particularly since he's flip-flopped, at least on the campaign trail in order to avoid Tea Party flak, on nearly all of the best things he did as governor, most specifically universal health coverage in MA -- is not necessarily a reflection on the job he did then.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||08/07/2011|
the Great Equivocator Romney Fan has spake!
|by Anonymous||reply 72||08/07/2011|
[quote]The MA economy improved dramatically during his tenure
Not really. And I note that you are, once again, carefully omitting his record on job creation. Free hint: it really sucked. As in near worst-in-the-nation sucked.
[quote]He did, however, successfully eliminate the state's projected $3 billion budget deficit
That is his claim. The reality is, though, that it was actually half that. And of the remainder, half of that was removed by the simple expedient of dipping into the rainy day fund.
[quote]through a combination of cuts and tax increases (albeit in the form of "fees")
And that is, in fact, another of Romney's problems. He raised half a billion dollars in new fees while simultaneously piously declaiming that he had not raised taxes. Not to mention advocating severe cuts while simultaneously trying to reduce the income tax rate on millionaires (gee, where have we heard that before?).
[quote]and he led the effort to turn around Boston's Big Dig project after its infamous ceiling collapse accident.
You might want to do a little more "research" on that, as Romney's administration is implicated in the process that led to that accident.
[quote]Please tell me you're not trying to assail his business record, considering he rose through the ranks over 20 years at Bain and ultimately not only became its CEO, but also launched an entire spinoff division on his own.
Let's talk about job creation, shall we? Since that is, after all, what Romney's prime talking point seems to be. Let's just say that Bain Capital was not known for that particular task. In fact, the opposite was the case.
[quote]The *only* other prominent Republican politician in the country with more solid of an actual CEO background is Mike Bloomberg.
And the correlation between success as a CEO and success as a President is what, exactly?
[quote]Because he wasn't a lousy governor, by any rational, unbiased standpoint
Actually, yeah, he kinda was. Like many CEOs who try politics, he proved to be not very good at it, as he continued to want to call the shots. He had frequent bitter fights with the state legislature and was never able to develop a successful working relationship with them. And no, it wasn't because he was a Republican, as Weld didn't have these kinds of problems. In fact, Romney did his best to stack the deck in his favor, spending $3 million and vigorously campaigning to oust Democratic members of the legislature, an effort that led to state Republicans having two *fewer* seats than before.
[quote]and most likely wouldn't be a lousy president.
Based on his campaign promises, yes, he would, in fact, be a lousy President.
[quote]My point was that the people of Massachusetts are clearly rather capricious in their opinions.
And yet, you have provided no evidence to support that assertion. Yes, they elected Brown. So? That just means that they elect the man rather than the party, which isn't exactly "capricious." They elected Weld and then Romney, with the latter proving to be extremely unpopular because he was not, in fact, a very good governor. Deal with it.
Oh, and next time you "research" a Presidential candidate's record, don't just look at their press releases.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||08/08/2011|
all of you people are only saying no because of the kind of person he is.. yes he is a bigot but. Romney knows more about business than any other candidate. Romney knows more about the economy than any other candidate. Romney lived over seas and speaks French. This would help in France, Canada, Haiti, across Africa, and other former French colonies.Romney, a former CEO, would would help international relations.Romney is more educated than any other presidential candidate
i can go on and on... Look at it from the political side/business side not from the type of person he is...
|by Anonymous||reply 74||10/24/2012|
Aw, now that's just sad.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||10/24/2012|
R74, you actually think overseas is 2 words?
|by Anonymous||reply 76||10/24/2012|
Your thought process is broken, R74. See someone to get it fixed.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||10/24/2012|
No, but a terrific anti Christ
|by Anonymous||reply 78||10/24/2012|
Big Business, Big Religion, Big Lies. Mormons everywhere, telling us how to live. Very uncreative, blinkered, patriarchal, and narrow people running things.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||10/24/2012|
This thread was attempted here, OP. But there were no serious takers.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||10/24/2012|
If you call neglect of the environment, cutting taxes for the rich, starting wars based on bald-faced lies (and Romney is good at baldfaced lying and flip flopping), cutting programs designed to help poor and lower middle income people and letting alliances and American diplomacy go to shit good things, then yes, Romney would be greater than any other president there has been except for George W Bush, IF you can say he was president; Bush started with a surplus achieved by the Clinton administration and squandered it in a matter of what, 2 years? The lion's share went to the rich; the late Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, despite his being a homophobe did call it right when he said that the Bush Regime was the biggest cash and carry scheme ever in American history. And you'll just get more of the same with Romney. Obama is trying to get back to the balanced budget and hopefully surplus of the Clinton years after a near Depression caused by the Dubya crowd. If you truly want Depression just vote for Romney. And after he's in let me know how all those "faith-based" government disbursements, this time led by the Mormons, are working for you.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||10/24/2012|
Your message just goes to show how ignorant of the facts most people voting for obama are. Not even worthy of a reply...
|by Anonymous||reply 82||10/29/2012|
I mean, other than shorting US dollar, shipping jobs abroad, hiding assets, and gambling with other people's money (which is basically what hedge funds do), what exactly has he done that showcases his business acumen?
|by Anonymous||reply 83||10/29/2012|
I so dislike Romney that I voted for Newt Gingrich in the primary (I'm a registered Republican).
When I heard that the Des Moines Register endorsed Mitt Romney -- "the first time they had endorsed a Republican for President since Richard M. Nixon" -- I thought, "Really?! Nixon? I wonder what Romney and Nixon could have in common."
I really don't want to find out. Obama 2012
|by Anonymous||reply 84||10/29/2012|
Seriously R82? Go fuck yourself.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||10/29/2012|
MITT ROMNEY WOULD BE THE BEST PRESIDENT THERE EVER WAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LET'S GET THE MUSLIM OUT OF OFFICE AND GET THE NATION MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION!!!!!!!!!!TOO BAD FOUR AMERICANS HAD TO DIE A HORRIBLE DEATH ON 9/11/12 BECAUSE WHEN THEY BEGGED FOR SECURITY FROM OBAMA, HE IGNORED THEIR PLEAS AND WENT TO BED WHEN THEY WERE BEING SLAUGHTERED!!!!!!!!!!! WHAT KIND OF A PRESIDENT IS THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!A MURDERER -ABSOLUTELY
|by Anonymous||reply 86||11/03/2012|
Well, let's look at his past performance:
BAIN Capital - Successfully built and ran a business that resurrected MANY nationwaide companies, including Staples and Sports Authority.
As Governor, he ran Massachusetts within smart budgets after total financial failure of his predecessor. He worked with a Dem majority to institute health care reform AT THE STATE LEVEL, W/O TAX INCREASES!
He got Mass. schools performing THE BEST IN THE USA, and they remain there today!
He RESCUED the Olympics after mismanagement began to cause the USA EMBARRASSMENT!
On top of ALL THIS, he picks Paul Ryan, A MATHMATICAL, BOOKKEEPING GENIOUS to help with the correction of our federal mismanagement.
Can ANYBODY think of a BETTER candidate to save us from the fiscal cliff approaching? The devaluing of the dollar?
Does anybody here think surrendering our national security to ANYBODY is acceptable???
|by Anonymous||reply 87||11/04/2012|
He would be a far, far worse president than even Dubbya. He doesn't have the patience or temperment for the position. He's arrogant, elitist, self-absorbed, and completely out of touch. He's been an utter embarassment and failure on the international stage. He was a failure as Governor of MA. And he has no concept that running a country is nothing at all like running a business (let alone the fact that his experience as a "businessman" is primarily as a vulture capitalist).
|by Anonymous||reply 88||11/04/2012|
R87 is delusional, spewing utter distortions as "fact", mistaking correlation for causation at best, outright lying at worst.
(the notion of Paul Ryan as a bookkeeping genius almost made me choke... that HAS to be a parody, given how ridiculous all his budget proposals are, and his central role in the ridiculous brinksmanship over the debt ceiling a year ago which directly caused the degrating of our credit rating)
R87, I can think of DOZENS of people who are better than Romney/Ryan ... probably hundreds. In fact, I'd be hard pressed to think of many people WORSE than Romney/Ryan to deal with the problems this country still has.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||11/04/2012|
I'm assuming R86 is a parody post. Nobody could be that fucking stupid.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||11/04/2012|
He appears to become easily bored and would soon tire of the demands of being President. He would hand off the actual act of governing to Ryan. I can't even imagine him enjoying state dinners or entertaining heads of state. Foreign policy would be disastrous. It would be a nightmare from which we might never wake.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||11/04/2012|
We need a little freewheeling business, oil-drilling, coal mining and just plain moneymaking for a few years. Screw the poor, the whiners and the greens for awhile so we can a least get back on our feet. Then, we can resume dancing our way to la-la land again. Romney will leave business alone and hopefully get rid of about 30% of the government.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||11/04/2012|
In a word, NO.
|by Anonymous||reply 93||11/05/2012|
I love the smell of freeper meltdowns in the morning!
|by Anonymous||reply 94||11/05/2012|
I don't believe Romney would make a good president at all, due to his obvious arrogance and inflexibility. He's paranoid, cold and strange-a poor man's Richard Nixon.
But even if I did think Romney would be an OK president, there is NO way I would vote for someone who has Paul Ryan as their next in line. Especially when you just know that Romney would end up having to resign for some ethics violation sooner than later.
|by Anonymous||reply 95||11/05/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 96||11/05/2012|
I'm a little perturbed that people think he'll just do a bunch of evil, despicable things to the U.S. The man has grandkids that will inherit the country, I'm sure he's concerned for their welfare- he's not Satan.
|by Anonymous||reply 97||11/06/2012|
He is Satan, r97.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||11/06/2012|
Sure Mitt has grand kids who'll inherit the country. No question they'll be just fine, r97. Only the 300 million rest of us will be fucked. That was a joke, right?
|by Anonymous||reply 99||11/06/2012|
I continued to be bewildered that this election is so close. Even though Obama wasn't the most popular guy, even with those who voted for him, he should be solidly in front of this clown. Initially, Romney was running way behind him until that first debate and then all at once he is a serious candidate??? I just don't get it.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||11/06/2012|
[quote] Does anyone here think that Mitt Romney would make a good President?
|by Anonymous||reply 101||11/06/2012|
[quote] his central role in the ridiculous brinksmanship over the debt ceiling a year ago which directly caused the degrating of our credit rating)
Don't forget that most people lost 25% or more of their 401K/retirement accounts because of ryan's gd debt ceiling stunt
|by Anonymous||reply 102||11/06/2012|
He'd be a good looking one, which is a rarity.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||11/06/2012|
Thankfully, this question is now purely hypothetical.
|by Anonymous||reply 104||11/06/2012|
Not in 100 million years.
|by Anonymous||reply 105||11/06/2012|
No, he would be a fucking nightmare.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||11/06/2012|
No. I simply don't trust Mitt Romney. I think he has more ability than Orack Obama, but I don't trust Mitt to act for,the benefit of the American people. Someone said on this thread that Mitt ismReagan without themalzheimers. This is essentially true.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||11/06/2012|