Does anyone actually like Mitt Romney?

Mark 1911 said:

Not crazy about Romney but would be far better than 4 more years of treason unchecked. He has the best odds to beat Obama, and we got to get rid of him, he is dismantling the Constitution

Click to expand...

It's amazing how much this has become engrained into people's heads. The OP stated specifically...

"I don't want to hear about how the president is the worst thing to ever happen to this country or how we the people need to get behind Romney to get Obama out and all that stuff I could listen to Fox news to hear. "

Romney is an awful choice for the presidency. Voting for Romney is a vote for Romney.

I don't care for Romney. I really don't care for Obama. I know I can't in good reason vote for Obama, there is no reason to vote for him unless you really want to see America dismantled in just four years.

But a vote for Romney may result in the same thing, but it will take a lot longer (how you like that I didn't use allot) from different causes and for different reasons.

A vote for any other candidate is a vote for Obama, so I have no idea what to do. I will make my decision on the day I vote, if it looks like Ron Paul is on the ticket as independent and has the numbers he has my vote. At least Ron Paul is hooked to the hip to the same cronies Obama or Romney are.

It may come down to what do you want? Do you want to see America destroyed quickly or slowly, I don't see us coming out of this deficit, nor the division between left and right without a real fight.

Considering the alternative ( that being 4 more years of obama and him being free to do what he really wants free from the constraints of worrying about re-election) Yes I like Mitt Romney. Notice I said "like" not enamoured, raptured or in love. I voted for Santorum in the primary ( he won here in La.) and he was my second choice after Herman Cain. However the libs pulled out all the stops and got employees of the inJustice Dept to accuse him of acting inappropriately. So would you like the luke warm bologna sandwich on not quite stale bread, (Mitt) or the rotten to the core crap burger swarming with obamabot zombie flies?

As far as Ron Paul goes, his ideas on the surface are good, however they rely on IMHO utopian ideals and rely on everyone else in the world agreeing to play by the same rules. People are tired of the presidency being a 4 year episode of American Idol already, we have a whiner who seems to want to be remembered as the first Kardashian president, people are certainly in no mood for anyone who they may percieve,right or wrong as unstable or unpredictable. IMO Paul simply cannot win, we need to all get up from the kid's table and realize we need a serious president who understands our economy and at least has some form of moral grounding. Obama has made us a laughing stock and Paul would do no better. So again, considering all alternatives realistically available, I "like" Mitt.

gunns said:

SNIP

A vote for any other candidate is a vote for Obama,

SNIP

Click to expand...

Mathematically this is not true. A vote for Ron Paul results in no vote for Obama. It also results in no vote for Romney. Whereas an actual vote for Obama would result in no vote for Romney and one vote for Obama. So, if you want to mistakenly concede that this is a two man race(Obama v Romney), then you realize that a vote for Ron Paul is a "no" vote for either of the two "real" candidates. So... mathematically a vote for Ron Paul is only half a vote for Obama and half a vote for Romney. Casting a vote for Obama is the only way to vote for Obama.

Duplicate post

Valerius said:

Considering the alternative ( that being 4 more years of obama and him being free to do what he really wants free from the constraints of worrying about re-election) Yes I like Mitt Romney. Notice I said "like" not enamoured, raptured or in love. I voted for Santorum in the primary ( he won here in La.) and he was my second choice after Herman Cain. However the libs pulled out all the stops and got employees of the inJustice Dept to accuse him of acting inappropriately. So would you like the luke warm bologna sandwich on not quite stale bread, (Mitt) or the rotten to the core crap burger swarming with obamabot zombie flies?.

Click to expand...

The primary was a beauty contest. Ron Paul won the majority of Delegates in our state.

Valerius said:

As far as Ron Paul goes, his ideas on the surface are good, however they rely on IMHO utopian ideals and rely on everyone else in the world agreeing to play by the same rules. People are tired of the presidency being a 4 year episode of American Idol already, we have a whiner who seems to want to be remembered as the first Kardashian president, people are certainly in no mood for anyone who they may percieve,right or wrong as unstable or unpredictable. IMO Paul simply cannot win, we need to all get up from the kid's table and realize we need a serious president who understands our economy and at least has some form of moral grounding. Obama has made us a laughing stock and Paul would do no better. So again, considering all alternatives realistically available, I "like" Mitt.

Click to expand...

I'd hate to turn this thread into a another Ron Paul discussion, but if MItt was a decent candidate maybe that wouldn't happen...

Ron Paul can win if people stop listening to the brainwashing on Fox. If as you say...

"we need to all get up from the kid's table and realize we need a serious president who understands our economy and at least has some form of moral grounding."

The we'd better forget this Romney RINO and get our support behind Ron Paul. He's the only one that fits your description.

Valerius said:

As far as Ron Paul goes, his ideas on the surface are good, however they rely on IMHO utopian ideals and rely on everyone else in the world agreeing to play by the same rules.

Click to expand...

Lest be honest here. Liberals (doesn't matter Democrat or Republican) has GREAT thoughts. Everyone should stay well fed, everyone should make a "livable" wage, no one should be denied healthcare, clean water, clean air etc. "The government can provide if you can't" sort of thoughts. But they don't work (completely) because you have people who try to "use" the system for their selfish reasons, not the way it was designed. Then you have one group supporting a large group of government users. This cannot continue if the users outgrow what the supporters can manage.

Conservatives on the other hand have dirty thoughts because they see the flaws. No one should be guaranteed food, wages. If they don't try to better themselves then we shouldn't have to worry about them. They think that if help is to be provided then it should be on a personal level, not on a forced, government level. They think that air and water is collateral damage to the economy to an extent. They want to government to enforce their values but little else.

These two groups what to rely on the government to enforce their opinion on Utopia.

Libertarians on the other hand mostly believes the government should stay out of anything that it doesn't have to be in. A government large enough to give you what you want is large enough to take everything you have. They do a fairly well job of that now. A Utopia to a Libertarian is one where rights only are enforced and the rest of the time they can be left alone. Without a victim their shouldn't be a crime.

If you are talking about Domestic policy.

If you are talking about Foreign policy. It is not our job to be the world police. How will other countries protect themselves against US? They cannot unless they can have similar weapons. Some countries would be less of a threat to us if we weren't the ones starting the hostilities. Others may wish to fight us regardless, but I think Paul is as capable of a military leaders as Romney or Obama.

In short, just because major media says something doesn't make it the truth or a lie, do your own research. If you come to the same conclusion separately after you seen all the facts not kept from you then that is a view that I will support you having.

Valerius said:

As far as Ron Paul goes, his ideas on the surface are good, however they rely on IMHO utopian ideals and rely on everyone else in the world agreeing to play by the same rules.

Click to expand...

I don't know if I've ever heard the Constitution described in that manner before.

Valerius said:

IMO Paul simply cannot win, we need to all get up from the kid's table and realize we need a serious president who understands our economy and at least has some form of moral grounding. Obama has made us a laughing stock and Paul would do no better. So again, considering all alternatives realistically available, I "like" Mitt.

Click to expand...

Ron Paul doesn't understand our economy? You make a statement like that preceded by "we need to all get up from the kid's table"?

Ron Paul predicted the housing burst 5+ years before it happened. Which of the "experts" and "geniuses" in Washington "who understand our economy" did that?

Ron Paul is heavily invested in gold. How much has that been up again?

Ron Paul is one of the few people who can make Ben Bernanke quake in his boots when asking questions about The Federal Reserve and monetary policy.

Which candidate has more moral grounding than the man who is incorruptible?

Kid's table, indeed.

Go ahead and vote for a Goldman Sachs flip flopper gun grabber if you want, but saying Ron Paul isn't serious and doesn't know economics and doesn't have moral grounding is deplorable.

There are videos of Ron Paul giving a speech from 10 years ago predicting the future. You would be well-served to watch them. Too bad he didn't give out winning lottery numbers while he was at it.

Romney is already showing his mediocrity...

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/romney-man-pastel

...if as is often said, “personnel is policy,” Romney’s decision to name former Utah governor Michael Leavitt to lead his presidential transition team is particularly disturbing, especially since Politico reports that Leavitt may become White House chief of staff if Romney wins.

...

...Leavitt has spent the last two years lobbying on behalf of Obamacare.

Click to expand...

What a staunch conservative he is turning out to be!

I'll be voting for Mr. Paul and could care less if you think it is a vote for Obama.

gutshot said:

You've asked the wrong question. The question is, "Who do you like better, Romney or Obama". They are the only viable candidates. Ron Paul is not going to be President. Get over it. Move on. Ross Perot will not be President, either. The only thing that could possibly happen if Ron Paul runs as a third party candidate, is to assure Obama's re-election, just like Perot did for Clinton. A vote for a third party is a wasted vote.

Click to expand...

Well said. As this seems to now be a pile on against those who dare to speak against Ron Paul allow me to retort before moving on. Libertarianism is a wonderful ideal truly it it is. But let's be honest, it like communism cannot survive in it's intended form because there will always be those who seek to gain over others. As far as rights being the only thing that the govt. enforces, that would be great if everyone agreed what everyone's rights are. For example, if I am protesting your business, and thereby driving away customers, whose right does the govt. protect? Your's to conduct a lawful business free of hindrance, or mine to protest? This is where the waters are muddied by people. Libertarianism and communism are nearly exact opposites, however they both rely on the simple principle of everyone in their respective systems agreeing 100% of the time on what that system should be, that will simply never happen. That is in fact human nature. Furthermore part of the reason Paul is not taken seriously is in fact due to the behavior of many ( not all ) of his supporters. Many of the tactics and behaviors used by the far left are also employed by those who clain to abhore said behavior. For example, any questioning of Paul's policies, even the most extreme are simply shouted down. There is no open dialogue at all. Paul supporters want to stick to the constitution, as do I. However it doesn't say anything in it about military intervention not being an option in securing our national security. Let's face it people, whether we like it or not what happens around the world affects us and we must protect ourselves both economically and militarily. Pulling our forces from around the world and bringing everyone home will not make the world like us. As gutshot stated, Paul will not be president, ever. Get over it, or continue stomping your foot and screaming " Paul or nothing!" Realistically Obama or Romney will win in November. One final thought, only those on the right seem to run third party candidates and bicker internally as much as we do. I believe that's because we all truly want what's best for our country. The left however simply lock step drink the kool-aid and do as they are told. This works against us because that uses our own dissention against us. No liberals or left leaning voters are going to break ranks and vote for Ron Paul. That's reality. Only those who would otherwise not vote for obama will vote for Paul, so realistically speaking, voting for paul simply takes away a vote that would otherwise be against obama. That's the ugly truth, the problem is we must remove our heads from the sand to see it clearly. Adieu.

dreamer said:

that is like saying that being kicked in the teeth is better than being kicked in the 'nads...

Why not just choose to not be kicked?

ron paul--2012
any other vote is a vote for serfdom...

Click to expand...

this

dmatting said:

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/romney-man-pastel

"Now that Mitt Romney has officially clinched the Republican nomination,"

Click to expand...

No, he hasn't.

It's amazing when professional political writers don't understand the politics they are talking about.

To me this election is about getting Obama out of the White House, period. Obama is an enemy of the United States working for the other side. His goal is to strip Americans of every freedom they thought was their heritage as Americans. I can't believe Americans were stupid enough to vote him in at all. Bush was a dream compared to this guy, and Romney would be a dream compared to this guy, despite all of Bush's and Romney's faults.

As a Catholic, I can't believe so many so-called Catholics voted for him, if it wasn't for them, he would have lost, and now he has declared war on Catholics. Betrayed the very people who voted him into office. In my view, the "Catholics" who voted for Obama were either deceived by his lies (benefit of the doubt), or not really Catholic at all and could care less about what happens to their fellow Catholic American's 1st Amendment rights. Obama is not only an enemy of gun owners and the 2nd Amendment, he is an enemy of the 1st Amendment, he is an enemy of Christians, and he picked the fight, we did not. Every time he opens his mouth and starts talking about his "Christian faith" it angers me, what a liar. At least Nero admitted he was the enemy as he had Christians killed. Obama pretends to be a Christian and a friend of Christians, smiling to their faces while while he steals their 1st Amendment freedom behind their backs.

For the first time in my life I am betrayed, insulted, and offended by one who claims that he is my president, but I say he is not. He has no interest in people like me, and I have none for him other than to see him out of office. Carter gave away the farm to the Russians, Clinton was an extreme liberal, but I never felt that they were my enemies. Clinton was an extreme liberal, but Obama is a socialist tyrant whose goal is to dismantle every freedom we know, the freedoms our fathers and grandfathers, and their fathers and grandfathers before them died for. They didn't die on battlefields just so we could piss those hard-won freedoms away on a traitor like Obama. My grandparents and great grandparents did not come to this country and sacrifice and work hard all their lives for their children just to have Obama flush it all down the toilet with a few strokes of a pen. Obama will destroy this country. His intent is to divide Americans and he has done a very good job of it. America has never been so divided since the civil war.

Shame on Obama for deceiving the American people, and for all his pandering to extreme liberals and socialists. Shame on Obama for fooling the American people, for outright blatantly lying to them. But shame on the American people if he wins again. If he wins again, we have nobody to blame except ourselves.

There is no true freedom without virtue.

Valerius said:

Libertarianism is a wonderful ideal truly it it is. But let's be honest, it like communism cannot survive in it's intended form because there will always be those who seek to gain over others.

Click to expand...

It's a good thing Ron Paul is a paleoconservative constitutionalist and not a libertarian then.

Valerius said:

Furthermore part of the reason Paul is not taken seriously is in fact due to the behavior of many ( not all ) of his supporters.
For example, any questioning of Paul's policies, even the most extreme are simply shouted down. There is no open dialogue at all.

Click to expand...

I call shenanigans.
Just like in your previous post about Paul, you not only didn't show any "open dialogue," but all you did is slam the man about things that aren't even true. There are various reasons someone could give for not wanting to vote for the most constitutional and most small-government and most honest candidate, but that "he doesn't understand economics" or is lacking morals or whatever is absolutely ridiculous.

Paul supporters are generally more than happy to discuss the actual issues because they know they are right. The big-government fake conservatives are full of crap when they talk about "small government" or being "fiscally conservative" or that they give a damn about the Constitution when it doesn't further their personal agenda. Their own record proves it!

Fake conservatives don't trust government to oversee their health care, yet they trust government to wiretap, indefinitely detain, and even murder U.S. citizens without transparency or due process.

Valerius said:

Paul supporters want to stick to the constitution, as do I. However it doesn't say anything in it about military intervention not being an option in securing our national security.

Click to expand...

Pretty sure it does.

Valerius said:

No liberals or left leaning voters are going to break ranks and vote for Ron Paul. That's reality. Only those who would otherwise not vote for obama will vote for Paul, so realistically speaking, voting for paul simply takes away a vote that would otherwise be against obama. That's the ugly truth, the problem is we must remove our heads from the sand to see it clearly. Adieu.

Click to expand...

What you call "reality" is merely wishful thinking. If Paul is the Republican nominee, he'd not only get the "anyone but Obama" vote, but he'd also pull in independents and Dems who feel about Obama like Republicans feel about Romney. Paul can pull in the "anyone but Obama" vote, the Real Conservative vote, the anti-war vote, the anti-police the world vote, the constitutional vote, the anti-mandated health care vote, the pro-gun vote, the honest-man-for-President vote, the anti-Fed vote, the let's actually balance the budget vote, the holy crap 16 trillion in debt is a big deal vote, the anti-Goldman Sachs vote, the anti-drone bomb innocent people who happen to be standing next to someone we might maybe think is a terrorist vote, etc etc etc.

Bottom line: a whole lot of people who bash Ron Paul bash him on things that aren't even true, and a whole lot of people who bash Ron Paul on the issues run away when actual debate on those issues is started.

I wouldn't have responded to your previous post at all if you had said you didn't like Paul because you're a fan of The Fed devaluing the currency and your savings or because you think Paul is too honest for his own good or because you'd simply prefer to vote for a gun-grabber, etc, but you combined your "kid's table" snark with saying Paul doesn't understand economics and with saying Paul lacks morals. Want to discuss the difference on issues between the candidates? Start a thread and let's go. But make sure to bring facts with you.

Daylen said:

wtf!? Huntsman was just the same as Romney.

Click to expand...

Well, I don't necessarily agree, though I do have a major complaint with Huntsman over following through. He retired early from his second term as Gov to become the China ambassador. Then retired from that rather quickly to run for pres.

In all honesty my favorite candidate is Ron Paul, but I don't consider him a republican, and never thought he had a chance on their ticket. He is a libertarian, and quite a dedicated one at that. He's also genuine, and will speak a hard truth, even when it's unpopular and will hurt his chances. He has integrity, and strong values, and he's the first candidate in my lifetime I've actually felt like I could trust to live what he preaches. Unfortunately, these traits don't seem to be what gets people elected I say all this knowing that I don't agree with all of his policies. Some of the things he would like the fed to give up to the states I don't agree with. But I also understand that without being on the ticket myself, I likely will never find a candidate I agree with 100%. I'm ok with that. To me, the integrity is the most important thing, and no other candidate has it.

But keep in mind, I say all this knowing I wouldn't vote for a republican unless it was Mr. Paul, and I never believed he would make it past the primary. I just might write him in come november.

I really don't care as long as he beats the obamanation.

gutshot said:

Even if everything you say is true, it does not change the fact that Romney has the nomination sewed up. Paul can not win the Republican nomination and can not win as a third party candidate. He does not have enough votes. I have as much chance as Ron Paul does, zero.

Click to expand...

Paul would have had a better chance if people wouldn't spread lies about him. If he doesn't win, so be it. But let's have some honesty about who he is and what he's about.

As for me, I figure I'll be voting for the candidate that is against NDAA and isn't a gun-grabber. Which candidate is that again?

gutshot said:

Even if everything you say is true, it does not change the fact that Romney has the nomination sewed up. Paul can not win the Republican nomination and can not win as a third party candidate. He does not have enough votes. I have as much chance as Ron Paul does, zero.

Click to expand...

So... you like Romney then right? This thread is asking if anyone actually LIKES Mitt. Do You?

I hate Romney. Look at his record, and some of the obsene, un-constitutional legislation he endorsed and signed into law as governor. This man is no better than Obummer. Both of these men are chosen before we have any hand in the "voting" process whatsoever. Both of these guys are globalist string puppets, and neither cares about our consitution, or our country. If we can't see what is happening right before us, and won't stand up to stop it, then do we even deserve all the freedoms they are stealing from us? We set around complaining, however we do nothing to stop the injustice that is happening in this country, and it makes me sad. Imagine what our founders would be doing if they were here today. We would already be involved in another revolution, and it would almost certainly be over by now because they would have taken action years ago! There is no diiference between a republican or a democrat any longer guys and gals, there are only constitution loving libertarians, or there is globalist utilitarianist socialists. Whoever is placed in office is there to continue the devastation of our country, and there is nothing we can do about that standing in front of a ballot box.

Um, no. Just another picked man to ascend to the presidency.