A question for the Romney apologists

[Chucktshoes]

In the discussions I have had on here there has been quite a lot of glossing over of Romney's very progressive record as governor of MA. The most common defense given is that "MA is a liberal progressive state and he did the beat he could." This defense begs one question, if Romney was really a conservative, how did he get to be governor of a liberal progressive state in the first place?

My guess is that you get there by being a liberal. His record as governor appears to back that up.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If he was the liberal you guess, he must not have been liberal enough for Mass. I doubt he's as liberal as you

say. But I'm not apologizing for him.

[kieefer]

I don't care what he did in MA. The objective now is to remove the communist-in-office.

Libertarians can push their 3rd party crap between 1/1/2013 and 2016, maybe then they can do better at the polls.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Ronald Reagan was a Democrat and a president of the Screen Actor's Guild, before he became a Republican.

How do you reconcile that?

[Chucktshoes]

Reagan had already developed a record of conservative action to back up his conversion prior to running for president. Romney didn't start trying to change his talk until he started looking at a run for the White House. If Romney had a record to back up his talk, I wouldn't be hammering on this point.

[TMF]

.

Edited September 12, 2012 by TMF

[TMF]

Does it really matter? There are only two men who stand a chance of winning in November. That is a fact.

The question that keeps being posed is would you rather get punched in the face or kicked in the balls? You can say "neither" but one of the two is going to happen whether you like it or not. I'd rather get punched in the face, and I'd like to at least get a say in the decision instead of having folks make that decision for me. I don't like it either, but you can choose to live in reality or fantasy pretend world where life is fair.

[MikePapa1]

I think the real question, Chuck, is are you happy with the current administration? If you are, then great, because anything that distracts from its actions or undermines the Republican nominee guarantees another term for our current President. I suppose the real question, do those who are unsatisified with the Republican candidate, but want the current administration defeated, have an alternative that stands a snowball's chance in Hades of winning? I think the answer is no.i am far more libertarian than Republican and, frankly,voted Libertarian in the last election, but I will do nothing in this one that will assist the current administration? The question isn't is Rominey my ideal candidate. The question is, is he better than the alternative?

[141FE]

I don't care what he did in MA. The objective now is to remove the communist-in-office.

Libertarians can push their 3rd party crap between 1/1/2013 and 2016, maybe then they can do better at the polls.

+1

Would you rather have 4 more years of Obama?

[Bloodbought1]

I think the real question, Chuck, is are you happy with the current administration? If you are, then great, because anything that distracts from its actions or undermines the Republican nominee guarantees another term for our current President. I suppose the real question, do those who are unsatisified with the Republican candidate, but want the current administration defeated, have an alternative that stands a snowball's chance in Hades of winning? I think the answer is no.i am far more libertarian than Republican and, frankly,voted Libertarian in the last election, but I will do nothing in this one that will assist the current administration? The question isn't is Rominey my ideal candidate. The question is, is he better than the alternative?

I agree with this!!!!

[Guest ThePunisher]

+1

Would you rather have 4 more years of Obama?

Well you know the lifelong democrats here want 4 more years of the commie. Yet they can't see with their own eyes that the D party is now a communist party. They are in denial. And some just have to vote their conscience, because their conscience tells them it is ok to have a commie to destroy the country.

[Defender]

I agree with this!!!!

Seems patently obvious to me, yet people that don't like Obama continue to beat Romney up. The time for that was before the primary. Now it's time to rally 'round the flag, boys! Otherwise we WILL get four more years of destroying our constitution and killing the country.

[mj12]

I think the real question, Chuck, is are you happy with the current administration? If you are, then great, because anything that distracts from its actions or undermines the Republican nominee guarantees another term for our current President. I suppose the real question, do those who are unsatisified with the Republican candidate, but want the current administration defeated, have an alternative that stands a snowball's chance in Hades of winning? I think the answer is no.i am far more libertarian than Republican and, frankly,voted Libertarian in the last election, but I will do nothing in this one that will assist the current administration? The question isn't is Rominey my ideal candidate. The question is, is he better than the alternative?

I have mixed emotions about Romney, but we'll not get into that. However, if I had to choose between the lesser of 2-evils, and I wil come November, I'd have to go with Romney. BHO clearly doesn't have the best interests of this nation at the center of his agenda. His total disregard for the rule of law, the constitution and usurping the authority of our limp-wristed Congress, via numerous executive orders, cramming a socialist health care program down the throats of Americans, are but a few examples. With that said, I'm not totally convinced that both Romney and BHO (aka Barry Soetoro) aren't puppets whose strings are being pulled by the same nefarious puppet-master, be it the NWO, the Bilderberg Group, et al. Think about it... as wealthy as Romney is; net worth between $200M and $250M, why would he be spending millions of dollars to get a job that pays an annual salary of $400K? To me, this smacks of some other purpose for getting into office. It's unfortunate that Ron Paul doesn't appear to have a snow-balls' chance in hell of getting elected. The pretty much narrows down the field.

But that's my .02 worth.

Edited September 12, 2012 by mj12

[Dennis1209]

In this moment in history four things are certain. Everyone is going to expire, your going to get taxed to death, the sun will rise in the East, and either a Democrap or Republican will become the next Commander in Chief next November.

Compared to what's presently in office, come November I'm walking into the polling place with a wooden clothes pin compressed on my olfactory sensor, take a couple of deep breaths, and electronically vote for the lessor of two weevils.

I'm by no means a supporter of what the Grand Ole Pathetic's (G.O.P.) have crammed down my gullet and I don't agree with Romney on many issues but...

I'm only one vote (two if you count my spouse) and my reasoning is simple. Vote for the politician who is most likely to send us down the same toilet bowl at a slower pace.

Maybe the next presidential primary will produce a third party candidate who has a chance to un-seat the current corrupt two party system.

Based on my assumptions, I sincerely hope the conservative minded voters don't waste their valuable votes on good men like Ron Paul in protest. Numbers don't lie (unless they're fidgeted of course), a protest vote is a vote for what's in office now and we'll see at least another four more years of his B.S.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Whole lot of common sense applied in this one. And not one apology!

I lean mostly libertarian, also, and things could have been done differently for decades. You don't just roll

out a candidate for president each time and not build a broad enough base to support him. Our country's

too big for that. The primary process worked, but not to some folks liking. Deal with it!

You would think an organization would learn from it's mistakes, instead of repeating it's mistakes each election

cycle. There needs to be a lot more Rand Pauls out there in several places of politics instead of just continually

running for the White House.

When it figures this out, I'll most likely be squarely in it's camp. Otherwise, it is too fringe for the masses to

understand and get behind.

[Chucktshoes]

Well you know the lifelong democrats here want 4 more years of the commie. Yet they can't see with their own eyes that the D party is now a communist party. They are in denial. And some just have to vote their conscience, because their conscience tells them it is ok to have a commie to destroy the country.

Be quiet when grown folks are talking. Don't come back until you can actually make a reasoned argument instead of the nonsense you have spouted so far.

The question isn't is Rominey my ideal candidate. The question is, is he better than the alternative?

I have stated clearly before that my answer to this question is 6 of one, half a dozen of another. Their words may differ slightly, but their records are not substantially different. Just as the antiwar lefties who supported O in the last election found out, once the guy gets into office he is not beholden to the platform he ran on.

Whole lot of common sense applied in this one. And not one apology!

.

I will give credit where credit is due, when asked straight out, there has been less equivocation and responses a little closer to what I see as the truth. "He may be a liberal bag of ####, but he's our liberal bag of ####. And hey, at least he's not Obama!"

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That may be the best I can hope to see out of you, but it's good enough.

I think we both want the same thing, just see different ways to get there. Too many things are out of our

say, anyway.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Be quiet when grown folks are talking. Don't come back until you can actually make a reasoned argument instead of the nonsense you have spouted so far.

And you are a real grown up. Such a response shows your juvenile mindset.

[Mr. Brooks]

Be quiet when grown folks are talking.

Perhaps you should heed your own advice.

Childlike comments like that only detract from the conversation.

[Links2k]

Be quiet when grown folks are talking. Don't come back until you can actually make a reasoned argument instead of the nonsense you have spouted so far.

I have stated clearly before that my answer to this question is 6 of one, half a dozen of another. Their words may differ slightly, but their records are not substantially different. Just as the antiwar lefties who supported O in the last election found out, once the guy gets into office he is not beholden to the platform he ran on.

I will give credit where credit is due, when asked straight out, there has been less equivocation and responses a little closer to what I see as the truth. "He may be a liberal bag of ####, but he's our liberal bag of ####. And hey, at least he's not Obama!"

I'm with you. I'm glad to see that you won't be bullied with all of the nonsense. To me Romney is EVERYTHING that has been said about Obama over the years with the exception of their religions. I'll vote in November, but I'll leave one spot blank. Obama does not deserve a vote and there is no way that I'm voting for the "clean cut Koresh".

Besides that, Tennessee is already decided in the presidential election.

[mikegideon]

Besides that, Tennessee is already decided in the presidential election.

Yep. Dickie Weed's gonna take it. Got a grass root campaign happening on Facebook

Trying to swing Chuck T his way right now. We only need one more vote!

Edited September 12, 2012 by mikegideon

[Chucktshoes]

Yep. Dickie Weed's gonna take it. Got a grass root campaign happening on Facebook

Trying to swing Chuck T his way right now. We only need one more vote!

Hey, I do like his idea about the bacon fat.

[MikePapa1]

Be quiet when grown folks are talking. Don't come back until you can actually make a reasoned argument instead of the nonsense you have spouted so far.

I have stated clearly before that my answer to this question is 6 of one, half a dozen of another. Their words may differ slightly, but their records are not substantially different. Just as the antiwar lefties who supported O in the last election found out, once the guy gets into office he is not beholden to the platform he ran on.

Then I suppose it makes no difference to you who is elected, so my question then becomes, Why do you care? If they are both the same and they are the only two with any chance, realistic or otherwise, of being elected, then why even start this thread? Look, even though I tend to be libertarian, Gary Johnson has no chance of garnering the necessary votes to be elected President. You are therefore perfectly happy with President Obama's re-election.

[mikegideon]

Hey, I do like his idea about the bacon fat.

I told you. Dickie is really an alter-ego of somebody else. That's ok... so is Obama .

[Chucktshoes]

Perhaps you should heed your own advice.

Childlike comments like that only detract from the conversation.

Couth, I ain't got it.

The same monotonous refrain of "you are just a democrat and want the commie to win" in every thread detracts from the conversations.

And you are a real grown up. Such a response shows your juvenile mindset.

So you think I'm childish? Good, maybe you'll stop wasting your time posting the same lame, nonsensical attack in every thread I am involved in. What part of "I think Romney is really a liberal based upon his record" are you failing to grasp? If Romney is too fiscally liberal for me, how can I be a Democrat? If I want to massively cut federal spending and involvement back to its constitutionally enumerated roles, to include ending ALL social service programs, even the ones the Republicans like, how exactly does that make me a Democrat? When you can back up your statements with something resembling a cogent argument based in some realm of logic, then I will take you seriously.