Why are you voting for Mitt Romney?

[trenchfoot]

Under Barry, gasoline prices have doubled, national debt has increased at an astounding record breaking pace, food stamp usage up with the encouragement of feds, Obamacare (no one knows how much this will cost), huge grants going to private equity to develop "green"
products which never materialize, promise of huge increase in infastructure projects? Naming the CEO of GE to be Jobs Czar while he exports American jobs.....etc. Yes I will be voting for the lesser of two evils _ Mitt

It was Mitt's party and it's ideology of greed above country that was in control of the government as they sat on their asses and watched the economy crash and burn as they got richer and richer beyond their wildest dreams. So tell me, honestly, what makes you think the folks who had the most influence over the economy, including your Mitt, would want to take responsibility for their actions, admit they screwed things up badly in the process of playing the system and exploiting it for maximum profit? What makes you think they'd want to fix something that would give them less profit on their profiteering schemes that almost ruined our nation in the process?

Why would you want to vote back in the same kind of folks who practically ruined the economy out of pure greed and lust for riches?

Why would you want to give them another opportunity to hoard even more of the country's wealth at the expense of the health of the nation as a whole? This is exactly what's going to happen if the very rich and influential folks like Mitt get to take complete control of the government again.

Didn't eight years of disasterous rule by the businessmen Bush/Cheney give you any kind of idea how things will turn out if another big time businessman just like Bush/Cheney (Your Mitt) gets ahold of the treasury?

So who really is the lesser of two evils?

Just asking.....

 

[DominionSeraph]

I'm voting for Romney because I need a change. You see, Fox News has been in full-on smear mode since around 2007. Bush was a lame duck and too damaged to shill for, so other than successfully pushing through the forced meme of the Tea Party and the occasional shill for Big Business, they haven't really been doing anything but attacking Democrats 24/7. But I've had their methods of creating and propagating that propaganda analyzed for a long time, so my little lab rats are boring me. I need them to go back to shilling to have any hope of getting anything new out of them.
Romney looks to be so mediocre that they will be riding the edge of cognitive dissonance with every glowing endorsement. I'm hoping that this will push them to heights to which, perhaps, they will discover a new way to deceive stupid people.
I do so love the advancement of human knowledge!

 

[irishScott]

Honestly...anyone who would vote for Romney needs to get a lobotomy. You went full retard. Of course you'll counter with some kind of nonsensical "Obama is a poopy head" but I'm not talking about Obama. Romney is a terrible candidate and I'd urge everyone to look at all the other candidates and choose a better one. Write one in if you have to. Voting for a complete joke though makes no sense.

People like you make me want to vote for Romney. Idiot.

 

[dank69]

People like you make me want to vote for Romney. Idiot.

Science tells us that is exactly what you will do. :thumbsup:

 

[OBLAMA2009]

meg whitman ran for governor claiming her "business experience" would enable her to solve the economic crisis and create job. she lost, took a job at hewlett packard and laid off 29,000 people. so much for "business experience" helping someone create jobs...romney the bankster may well be the most dangerous person to ever run for president

 

[diesbudt]

One thing we have to remember.

We have seen a good sample of what Obama can/has done in office of President.

We have not seen anything that Mitt will do. Only speculation. Could be the best, or worst presidental candidate ever. Won't know until he is given a chance.

I don't like either, but I am not enjoying most of the government's current actions, so why not try a change? and since no third party is ever going to get a real chance, that only leaves 1 option left.

Plus I would rather take a chance and roll the dice on a wild card, than sit on a hand of a pair of 4s.

 

[OBLAMA2009]

One thing we have to remember.

We have seen a good sample of what Obama can/has done in office of President.

We have not seen anything that Mitt will do. Only speculation. Could be the best, or worst presidental candidate ever. Won't know until he is given a chance.

I don't like either, but I am not enjoying most of the government's current actions, so why not try a change? and since no third party is ever going to get a real chance, that only leaves 1 option left.

Plus I would rather take a chance and roll the dice on a wild card, than sit on a hand of a pair of 4s.

of course it isnt true that you dont know what kind or president romney would be without "giving him a chance". his background is in banksterism, do you really think making that type of person president is going to be helpful? i thought people like that caused the problems this country is now facing

 

[diesbudt]

of course it isnt true that you dont know what kind or president romney would be without "giving him a chance". his background is in banksterism, do you really think making that type of person president is going to be helpful? i thought people like that caused the problems this country is now facing

Well people forget the president is only 1 small fraction of the government. The president has to work with Congress. And Since I bet this year Congress will be much closer to a 50/50 split, I don't see Obama and his administration giving much compensation to Republicans to get stuff they want passed for their votes, meaning another boring 2 or 4 years.

So backgrounds do not matter, because they are forced to play ball with the Congressmen and Congresswomen. It is the Legislative branch I would be more concerned about, as I believe it has way too much power over the 3 branches of government.

However, maybe Romney will be all for working with Democrats? Probably not but who knows.

Everyone thinks the president is the sole control of the government, but they forget they still have to work WITH Congress to get things done.

 

[csteggo]

The election isn't just about Obama and Romney, but in my mind at least who gets to nominate more than just one SCOTUS member. I doubt either will do anything that will curtail the unfortunate trend of increased government authority over the citizen, something that thrills some here, but Mitt is likely to do less damage to the Constitution. As far as policies go the Dems will act like the Reps did and kill anything that Romney attempts so there will be 4 more years of gridlock in all probability. Obama will be unchained and his "general welfare" being defined as whatever the government can insert itself into for his vision and that's something I'd like to avoid.

Both suck, because our political system in unimaginative, unethical, immoral and plain stupid, but then that just reflects the qualities of those that support it.

A person can't dislike Mitt Romney for his policies. We have no clue what they would be. Just this weekend he said he would like to keep aspects of ACA. Problem with that is that he has been saying all along that he wants to repeal all of it. His own campaign representatives espouse a different viewpoint. He and Ryan will not pin down any of the loopholes they would close even after given plenty of opportunity this weekend. How can anyone think he would reduce gov't or gov't spending. He has given 0 concrete examples of it. Please someone point or source me where I am wrong. I would love to have a choice.

There are other factors but this is so important. After the Citizens United case I don't know if our already painfully handicapped election system can handle another republican appointee.

 

[irishScott]

Science tells us that is exactly what you will do. :thumbsup:

Not really. I helped vote in Virginia's two Democrat senators and in light of good 'ol boy Allen coming back like a bad herpes attack I've already decided to vote for Kaine this year.

I vote for moderates when possible. Romney is playing the election game right now, but IMO he's much more moderate than Obama.

 

[soulcougher73]

Even if i would vote for Romney, i wouldnt due to the electoral college. Here in KS he is a shoe in, so my one vote wouldnt matter.

 

[Icepick]

I've got news for those who plan to vote for Mitt Romney because you believe he will not increase the debt as much as Obama might over the next four years. You believe that since he's a Republican candidate that he will reduce government spending? Think again.

Mitt Romney said congressional Republicans were wrong to accept a deal last year that could ultimately result in across-the-board spending cuts, including massive cuts to the military.

"I thought it was a mistake on the part of the White House to propose it," Romney said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I think it was a mistake for Republicans to go along with it."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-weighs-in-on-eastwood-health-care/?hpt=hp_t2

 

[OutHouse]

Haven't decided who to vote for yet. Don't like either of them. Unimpressed with either set of policies.

this.

 

[wayliff]

I think the real Mitt Romney is not too different from Obama...unfortunately I am not sure which is the real Romney.

I instantly disqualified Romney because I have absolutely no clue what he stands for.
One year he is for something (i.e. Universal Health Care, Pro-Choice, Pro-Tarp) and the next it is the opposite.

Rick Santorum, although I don't like his platform, was at least consistent on his views\positions, or at least I have not seen evidence of the contrary.

The GOP's 'fix the deficit with deep cuts' plan, I think, will only slow down the economy machinery even further. Severe Austerity will make the US move towards Greece's situation. One difference, I think, is that the GOP is not planning on doing any tax increases which is generally part of Austerity, so the US may not move towards Greece's position as fast.

I do not agree with a tax increase, at this time, but I do think the current, and temporary, income tax breaks should be allowed to expire for a good portion of Americans...which is the cutoff, I don't know for sure. 150k? or 250k? might be a start and since we have a marginal tax then only what is above that cutoff would be taxed at higher rates.

I do wish there were more viable candidates to consider, perhaps like Ron Paul or Jon Hunstman, but at the time I am going for what I perceive as better and that is Obama.

These are the disorganized thoughts this thread got going in me.
Whomever you decide to vote for, go out an vote.

 

[Lithium381]

I think the real Mitt Romney is not too different from Obama...unfortunately I am not sure which is the real Romney.

I instantly disqualified Romney because I have absolutely no clue what he stands for.
One year he is for something (i.e. Universal Health Care, Pro-Choice, Pro-Tarp) and the next it is the opposite.

Rick Santorum, although I don't like his platform, was at least consistent on his views\positions, or at least I have not seen evidence of the contrary.

The GOP's 'fix the deficit with deep cuts' plan, I think, will only slow down the economy machinery even further. Severe Austerity will make the US move towards Greece's situation. One difference, I think, is that the GOP is not planning on doing any tax increases which is generally part of Austerity, so the US may not move towards Greece's position as fast.

I do not agree with a tax increase, at this time, but I do think the current, and temporary, income tax breaks should be allowed to expire for a good portion of Americans...which is the cutoff, I don't know for sure. 150k? or 250k? might be a start and since we have a marginal tax then only what is above that cutoff would be taxed at higher rates.

I do wish there were more viable candidates to consider, perhaps like Ron Paul or Jon Hunstman, but at the time I am going for what I perceive as better and that is Obama.

These are the disorganized thoughts this thread got going in me.
Whomever you decide to vote for, go out an vote.

So you know the real Obama? Seems to me he was playing soft this first term to ensure a 2nd term, then he's going to be much more radical. Time will tell. I'm not voting for either of the two major candidates, I'll probably cast a vote for Johnson. . .

 

[wayliff]

So you know the real Obama? Seems to me he was playing soft this first term to ensure a 2nd term, then he's going to be much more radical. Time will tell. I'm not voting for either of the two major candidates, I'll probably cast a vote for Johnson. . .

I do not think we know the real anyone in politics.
The answer to your question may be 'no' but I have compared and made a choice based on that comparison.

 

[rickon66]

Somebody famous said, " If you are not a liberal when you are young, you have no heart; If you are not a conservative when you are old, you have no brain." It would be interesting to see the demographics behind the comments here. You liberals talk about hate, the guy who wanted to pump bullet after bullet into conservatives-now there is a hater. I may disagree with you, but a bullet is hardly a rational argument.

 

[irishScott]

Somebody famous said, " If you are not a liberal when you are young, you have no heart; If you are not a conservative when you are old, you have no brain." It would be interesting to see the demographics behind the comments here. You liberals talk about hate, the guy who wanted to pump bullet after bullet into conservatives-now there is a hater. I may disagree with you, but a bullet is hardly a rational argument.

Winston Churchill. I'm not entirely sure I agree. I'm 24, as long as I can remember I've been a moderate on most things.

I blame the internet for much of our polarization. Back when that quote was spoken it was a lot easier to be innocently naive one way or another. Experience meant a lot more as access to raw information was largely limited by it. Nowadays a lot of people rationalize the shit out of their beliefs because they're bombarded with information they don't like. Rational people can take that information and do something with it, the irrational majority just want their political-chest-thumping "hell yeah!" and will suck the cock of whatever dogma that gives it to them.

There are plenty on this very forum who could convince themselves that 1 + 1 = 1457923 if their fragile psyches demanded it, and all the evidence in the world wouldn't convince them otherwise. Bunch of rats pressing orgasm buttons until they die of thirst.