• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

For those of you who endorse Mitt Romney, explain why

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Mitt's probably the "least bad" Republican candidate in my mind (at least among the candidate whoever stood a shot).

I don't know why flip-flopper is such a dirty word... given the choice between someone who's going to stick to his convictions all the way into hell (eg: GWB) versus someone who's generally going to do whatever 50.1% of voters want him to do, I'd pick the pragmatist.
 
astroidea said:
He does undoubtably have an impressive background. However, that still doesn't answer the question of what his plan is and how it could possibly help get us out of this financial crisis.

Also, how do you feel about Romney being in bed with Wall St?
romney.jpg
Click to expand...

loliberals
botopcontrib.jpg
 
loki8481 said:
Mitt's probably the "least bad" Republican candidate in my mind (at least among the candidate whoever stood a shot).

I don't know why flip-flopper is such a dirty word... given the choice between someone who's going to stick to his convictions all the way into hell (eg: GWB) versus someone who's generally going to do whatever 50.1% of voters want him to do, I'd pick the pragmatist.
Click to expand...

Ask republicans when Kerry was running...
 
loki8481 said:
Mitt's probably the "least bad" Republican candidate in my mind (at least among the candidate whoever stood a shot).

I don't know why flip-flopper is such a dirty word... given the choice between someone who's going to stick to his convictions all the way into hell (eg: GWB) versus someone who's generally going to do whatever 50.1% of voters want him to do, I'd pick the pragmatist.
Click to expand...

Flip flopping isn't dirty in itself, but if a politician is changing his stances between audiences, or after sponsorships, you know something really dirty is going on.
 
mchammer187 said:
How can you really say that about Paul? If anything he appears to one to put his money where his mouth is and I can at least respect him for that even if I don't agree with a lot of what he says.

His voting record from what I can tell is very consistent as well.
Click to expand...

We need fewer, not more, ideologues in government. Just look at how colossally fucked up Congress is because of the uncompromising Teabaggers.
 
homercles337 said:
We need fewer, not more, ideologues in government. Just look at how colossally fucked up Congress is because of the uncompromising Teabaggers.
Click to expand...

I am no champion of Paul but he seems more pragmatic than your post indicates. I don't see anything in his history that shows he is unwilling to make a deal. You can't conpromise on things like the Iraq war or the patriot act which are two things he voted against.

On the other hand he does see a lot of things for what they really are unlike pretty much all of the tea party who call for drastic cuts to government but oh don't touch my Medicare social security or military spending. The tea party does not live in reality. The republican establishment just panders to them for votes but at least I feel they can see the big picture even if they have no real desire to change things.
 
I'm more curious as to why non-racist people would support Ron Paul and if they can explain why they support him despite the fact that he is anti-Constitution and anti-civil liberties.
 
Jhhnn said:
In general, our resident Righties support Paulism, or Rick Parry, the idealized Repub candidate who exists only in their imaginations... Ron Paul is mostly a figment of their imaginations, too.

They got nothin', other than foam around their lips...
Click to expand...

Get over yourself. Ron Paul is Mr Veto, and realistically speaking Mr Veto is about all we can expect from a president. A president needs to force congress to be accountable for its deficit financing. But because people are trained by the corporate media (the owners of which all just happen to be the owners of most of our public debt) to not care about debt, they see no reason to elect a Ron Paul. So they go with mr status quo: Romney. This is election is nothing but a show of power for the elite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top