When Romney wins the nomonation what will those of you on the right that h8 em do?

[Liability]

It's still just "IF."

It's still not "when."



Hate to derail anything with a statement of the facts but, wtf? It was kind of entertaining.

 

[California Girl]

As with a good deal of votes.... a vote "for" is not so much a vote becasue you want them to win... but a vote "against" so the others ass will NOT win. I think a good deal of the voting will go this way.

If voting against someone was good enough to get them out, BUsh-43 would have been a one term president like his dad.

The Democrats were very motivated to get him out. So they voted for a guy who seemed "electable" with a narrative that looked great if no one looked at it too closely.

Sound familiar?

I have been saying for quite a while that the Republicans are in the same position of the Democrats in 2004. There is a seated President who is beatable, but their candidates are too weak.

I was of a similar opinion to you, until I made the effort to inform myself about the candidates. I don't see Romney as 'weak' at all. In fact, quite the opposite.

 

[Liability]

Romney has been the front runner for some time now and apparently Newt has lit a fire in your collective asses. So when he wins what do you do then? If Romney is to liberal for you will you just sit it out and LET Obama, who is ten times further to the left, have another term?

Many say we only got one shot to repeal O'care so does that even matter to you?

He isn't my first choice but by god he is miles ahead on the list as compared to Obama.

IF.

If Mitt gets the nod, I will be FORCED -- compelled even -- to make a choice.

Cast my vote to Re-elect President Obama or vote for his opponent?

Hm.

Now there's a real poser!

You can always do a write in vote, but you will do a right in vote, pull the lever, goodnight.

I see you missed the point.

Alas.

No. No write in.

No 3P.

If Mitt is the eventual nominee of the GOP and President Obama (in a barn burner) manages to eek out a win for the Democrat Parody nod, then I will vote for Mitt in the General Election.

I won't love it. In fact, I won't much like it. But I will do it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Romney is not, I think, a weak candidate. The question is whether he will be strong enough in the battle for the presidency. I hope so.

 

[NoNukes]

If voting against someone was good enough to get them out, BUsh-43 would have been a one term president like his dad.

The Democrats were very motivated to get him out. So they voted for a guy who seemed "electable" with a narrative that looked great if no one looked at it too closely.

Sound familiar?

I have been saying for quite a while that the Republicans are in the same position of the Democrats in 2004. There is a seated President who is beatable, but their candidates are too weak.

I was of a similar opinion to you, until I made the effort to inform myself about the candidates. I don't see Romney as 'weak' at all. In fact, quite the opposite.

This is what many on the left are saying, but because of this, the right are against Romney. He is the strongest in a very weak field, and many Republicans are not happy about what the candidates are saying. Candidates who were the extreme not long ago are now the norm.

 

[NoNukes]

IF.

If Mitt gets the nod, I will be FORCED -- compelled even -- to make a choice.

Cast my vote to Re-elect President Obama or vote for his opponent?

Hm.

Now there's a real poser!

You can always do a write in vote, but you will do a right in vote, pull the lever, goodnight.

I see you missed the point.

Alas.

No. No write in.

No 3P.

If Mitt is the eventual nominee of the GOP and President Obama (in a barn burner) manages to eek out a win for the Democrat Parody nod, then I will vote for Mitt in the General Election.

I won't love it. In fact, I won't much like it. But I will do it.

Then you are the one who missed the point.

 

[Liability]

You can always do a write in vote, but you will do a right in vote, pull the lever, goodnight.

I see you missed the point.

Alas.

No. No write in.

No 3P.

If Mitt is the eventual nominee of the GOP and President Obama (in a barn burner) manages to eek out a win for the Democrat Parody nod, then I will vote for Mitt in the General Election.

I won't love it. In fact, I won't much like it. But I will do it.

Then you are the one who missed the point.

Not at all, unless you are referring to the sterling clarity of your prose: "You can always do a write in vote, but you will do a right in vote, pull the lever, goodnight."

Whateverthefuck that abortion of a would-be sentence might have been intended to mean.

 

[Liability]

Romney is not, I think, a weak candidate. The question is whether he will be strong enough in the battle for the presidency. I hope so.

It makes no difference to you, Fakey. You will be voting for your Party's standard bearer, President Obama.

But even if your child-king loses, you'll be "ok" with Romney since he's essentially a liberal Democrat-lite RINO anyway.

 

[freedombecki]

Which did what? Changed the statute of limitations on filing, and marked the first Bill that Obama signed and the first campaign promise that he broke.....

And which "promise" would that be?

Selective memory? Something about every bill being published for the public to read it for 5 days before he signs it...You remember all those lies about transparency that went along with it....

Hurrah, Ollie. You're right. This president says things he is going to do but when nobody's looking, does the opposite. He's leaving a real bad taste in America's mouth.

 

[freedombecki]

Equal Pay Act of 1963.

I'm sure you've never heard of it.

And that was based upon Gender.

TRY again.

Does NOT negate firing for non-performance.

*Idiot*

You know, it amazes me how you can consistently come on here every day screaming and crying and frothing at the mouth .... about topics you don't understand in any way.

I was an employer for over 20 years, and he is right on. The kicker is, I tested people mathematically before letting them work for me, but learned intelligence and performance are 2 different items. Performance is what you understand when you had to leave the premises for a few hours to drum up business and find tasks undone, irrelevant phone usage all day while you couldn't get through to your business, along with diminished sales and missing merchandise out the wazoo.

 

[California Girl]

I have been saying for quite a while that the Republicans are in the same position of the Democrats in 2004. There is a seated President who is beatable, but their candidates are too weak.

I was of a similar opinion to you, until I made the effort to inform myself about the candidates. I don't see Romney as 'weak' at all. In fact, quite the opposite.

This is what many on the left are saying, but because of this, the right are against Romney. He is the strongest in a very weak field, and many Republicans are not happy about what the candidates are saying. Candidates who were the extreme not long ago are now the norm.

I tend to ignore labels like 'extreme' and that bullshit... it's like calling someone a 'racist'... it's been lied about so often that it has become meaningless.

 

[freedombecki]

I have been saying for quite a while that the Republicans are in the same position of the Democrats in 2004. There is a seated President who is beatable, but their candidates are too weak.

I was of a similar opinion to you, until I made the effort to inform myself about the candidates. I don't see Romney as 'weak' at all. In fact, quite the opposite.

This is what many on the left are saying, but because of this, the right are against Romney. He is the strongest in a very weak field, and many Republicans are not happy about what the candidates are saying. Candidates who were the extreme not long ago are now the norm.

If Romney is so weak, he is still a million times better than President Obama because he knows how to put a large economy back in the black which will boom the stock market and decimate unemployment.

Obama just can't furnish confidence to small businesses and conservatives, whom he and his disciples consider a detriment to their big government and socialistic ambitions for this nation.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Romney is not, I think, a weak candidate. The question is whether he will be strong enough in the battle for the presidency. I hope so.

It makes no difference to you, Fakey. You will be voting for your Party's standard bearer, President Obama.

But even if your child-king loses, you'll be "ok" with Romney since he's essentially a liberal Democrat-lite RINO anyway.

I am a Republican and you are a RINO parody of the extreme right, a secular Waleran Bigod.

 

[TexM3]

If voting against someone was good enough to get them out, BUsh-43 would have been a one term president like his dad.

The Democrats were very motivated to get him out. So they voted for a guy who seemed "electable" with a narrative that looked great if no one looked at it too closely.

Sound familiar?

I have been saying for quite a while that the Republicans are in the same position of the Democrats in 2004. There is a seated President who is beatable, but their candidates are too weak.

I was of a similar opinion to you, until I made the effort to inform myself about the candidates. I don't see Romney as 'weak' at all. In fact, quite the opposite.

Given, as another poster pointed out, that O and Mitt are:

Immigration - same
Federal Reserve - same
Free Trade - same
War on drugs - same
Revising our tax code - same
Deficit - same
Big government, big spending - same
Stripping away freedoms – same

Help me understand what you use to conclude Mitt is a strong candidate?

Not trying to be snarky…I have read some of your other post and you seem very reasonable but this on this issue…

 

[JoeB131]

I was of a similar opinion to you, until I made the effort to inform myself about the candidates. I don't see Romney as 'weak' at all. In fact, quite the opposite.

This is what many on the left are saying, but because of this, the right are against Romney. He is the strongest in a very weak field, and many Republicans are not happy about what the candidates are saying. Candidates who were the extreme not long ago are now the norm.

If Romney is so weak, he is still a million times better than President Obama because he knows how to put a large economy back in the black which will boom the stock market and decimate unemployment.

Obama just can't furnish confidence to small businesses and conservatives, whom he and his disciples consider a detriment to their big government and socialistic ambitions for this nation.

Small businesses and conservatives are a small fraction of the electorate. A much larger slice of the electorate are "people who've had their lives disrupted because Wall Street Bloodsuckers ran roughshod over their lives".

Seriously, you could have film of Obama clubbing baby seals on the South Lawn and it wouldn't look as bad as Mittens and his "I like to fire people" BS.

 

[SFC Ollie]

This is what many on the left are saying, but because of this, the right are against Romney. He is the strongest in a very weak field, and many Republicans are not happy about what the candidates are saying. Candidates who were the extreme not long ago are now the norm.

If Romney is so weak, he is still a million times better than President Obama because he knows how to put a large economy back in the black which will boom the stock market and decimate unemployment.

Obama just can't furnish confidence to small businesses and conservatives, whom he and his disciples consider a detriment to their big government and socialistic ambitions for this nation.

Small businesses and conservatives are a small fraction of the electorate. A much larger slice of the electorate are "people who've had their lives disrupted because Wall Street Bloodsuckers ran roughshod over their lives".

Seriously, you could have film of Obama clubbing baby seals on the South Lawn and it wouldn't look as bad as Mittens and his "I like to fire people" BS.

Oh Please, keep it in context. I like to fire people too, if they screw up my business......

 

[JoeB131]

Small businesses and conservatives are a small fraction of the electorate. A much larger slice of the electorate are "people who've had their lives disrupted because Wall Street Bloodsuckers ran roughshod over their lives".

Seriously, you could have film of Obama clubbing baby seals on the South Lawn and it wouldn't look as bad as Mittens and his "I like to fire people" BS.

Oh Please, keep it in context. I like to fire people too, if they screw up my business......

I've had to fire people, but I've never liked it. It's a very unpleasent thing to have to do. Sometimes it's necessary, I'll agree.

But in Romney's case, most of the people he fired were just in the wrong place in the wrong time. Namely in between him and a bag full of money.

 

[Full-Auto]

If Romney is so weak, he is still a million times better than President Obama because he knows how to put a large economy back in the black which will boom the stock market and decimate unemployment.

Obama just can't furnish confidence to small businesses and conservatives, whom he and his disciples consider a detriment to their big government and socialistic ambitions for this nation.

Small businesses and conservatives are a small fraction of the electorate. A much larger slice of the electorate are "people who've had their lives disrupted because Wall Street Bloodsuckers ran roughshod over their lives".

Seriously, you could have film of Obama clubbing baby seals on the South Lawn and it wouldn't look as bad as Mittens and his "I like to fire people" BS.

Oh Please, keep it in context. I like to fire people too, if they screw up my business......

As a former corporate hatchet man. I approve this message.

 

[bripat9643]

I am a Republican and you are a RINO parody of the extreme right, a secular Waleran Bigod.

You're about as Republican as Mao Tse Tung.

 

[kyzr]

I have been saying for quite a while that the Republicans are in the same position of the Democrats in 2004. There is a seated President who is beatable, but their candidates are too weak.

I was of a similar opinion to you, until I made the effort to inform myself about the candidates. I don't see Romney as 'weak' at all. In fact, quite the opposite.

Given, as another poster pointed out, that O and Mitt are:

Immigration - same
Federal Reserve - same
Free Trade - same
War on drugs - same
Revising our tax code - same
Deficit - same
Big government, big spending - same
Stripping away freedoms – same

Help me understand what you use to conclude Mitt is a strong candidate?

Not trying to be snarky…I have read some of your other post and you seem very reasonable but this on this issue…

A quick look at the GOP field:

Mitt is very smart and has always found ways to be successful, he is a can-do guy, a problem-solver. However, he is a 1%er and will owe much to his backers, I don't like when he trots out the old "cut taxes bullshit".

Newt is an old fat bullshit artist, who sold us out to Freddie Mac, and even his fellow congressmen (Coburn for example) won't vote for him. Newt is toast, too old, too fat, too lazy, too ornery, too crooked, he can't dodge FREDDIE MAC.

Santorum is also smart, but he's avoiding solving Medicare, Medicaid and SS. He's more into social engineering. A good thing, but not the biggest problem we have right now.

Ron Paul has his loyal 25%, but he is going nowhere, too old and too weird.

Obama is a very sharp politician if not a great president. If he gets us out of wars and starts to get the economy and entitlements improving, he stands a good chance to be re-elected.