Unfortunately I think you are right.O-Trap;1049181 wrote:If he wins the GOP nod, it doesn't matter whether he wins or loses.
I respectfully disagree, we can debate how "right" or "left" Romney is vis a vis Obama is, but from a practical standpoint Romney has at least government and business experience and can help us out more when this nation is in its most needed period as opposed to an absent, aloof and tone deaf administrator.jmog;1049197 wrote:Unfortunately I think you are right.
If I am forced to choose between Romney and Obama, I would go with Romney. However, it would be a vote I would hate to cast. Romney is about 1 millimeter more to the "right" than Obama. He's pandering to conservatives now during the campaign, but realistically he is even more "moderate" or left than McCain ever was
Ron Paul can't win, he won't win Pennsylvania and Michigan, and likely not Florida or Ohio. He can be a valued cabinet secretary, but he won't be POTUS. At this point shouldn't we make sure that we don't have four more years of economic ineptitude, and a projected $20-22T debt? Just to make that point clear it is $20,000,000,000,000 to $22,000,000,000,000. Are we paying this or are we just going to screw our kids (the boomers have done this already with phase outs in the ponzi, cough, social security scheme) or monetize our debt and get in a "chess" game with China.sleeper;1049309 wrote:There's no chance I vote Romney, there's no chance I vote Obama. I'm hoping Ron Paul runs as a 3rd party candidate and garners a significant amount of the popular vote. Ron Paul could be the start of a viable third party in this country, one that believes in freedom, liberty, and the constitution. I've said it before, I don't agree with everything that Ron Paul stands for, but I do agree with his views more than any candidate in my lifetime. My view is that Republicans and Democrats both are unwilling to make the tough choices to save this country. Their only difference is which path they want to take to lead us to the same destination.
A vote for Ron Paul will ensure that BHO has another 4 years in the White House.sleeper;1049309 wrote:There's no chance I vote Romney, there's no chance I vote Obama. I'm hoping Ron Paul runs as a 3rd party candidate and garners a significant amount of the popular vote. Ron Paul could be the start of a viable third party in this country, one that believes in freedom, liberty, and the constitution. I've said it before, I don't agree with everything that Ron Paul stands for, but I do agree with his views more than any candidate in my lifetime. My view is that Republicans and Democrats both are unwilling to make the tough choices to save this country. Their only difference is which path they want to take to lead us to the same destination.
I agree with you entirely. I don't think Ron Paul can win, but I am also not a Republican. I fail to see how Romney is going to prevent us from going further into debt or changing anything significantly enough to avoid the scenario you outlined in your post. Will he be better than Obama? Maybe. Will he do anything to prevent us from the current path of complete failure? Unlikely.Manhattan Buckeye;1049324 wrote:Ron Paul can't win, he won't win Pennsylvania and Michigan, and likely not Florida or Ohio. He can be a valued cabinet secretary, but he won't be POTUS. At this point shouldn't we make sure that we don't have four more years of economic ineptitude, and a projected $20-22T debt? Just to make that point clear it is $20,000,000,000,000 to $22,000,000,000,000. Are we paying this or are we just going to screw our kids (the boomers have done this already with phase outs in the ponzi, cough, social security scheme) or monetize our debt and get in a "chess" game with China.
Does that bother you that who ever has the most money is likely to win the nomination?Con_Alma;1049326 wrote:There's no way Ron Paul will get the nomination. He doesn't have the money to.
It's a risk I'm willing to take. I simply don't trust that Romney will be any different than BHO. I agree with Cleveland Buck that it would almost be better for Obama to win because at least the Republicans in congress will try to stop him as opposed to Romney.wkfan;1049347 wrote:A vote for Ron Paul will ensure that BHO has another 4 years in the White House.
I would think that an alumnus of the Fisher School would appreciate Romney's success in business and have confidence in his ability to turn the economy around by pinpointing and eliminating government bureaucracies, inefficiencies, and pointless/overbearing regulations.sleeper;1049350 wrote:It's a risk I'm willing to take. I simply don't trust that Romney will be any different than BHO. I agree with Cleveland Buck that it would almost be better for Obama to win because at least the Republicans in congress will try to stop him as opposed to Romney.
Yep.sleeper;1049349 wrote:Does that bother you that who ever has the most money is likely to win the nomination?
Yep.wkfan;1049347 wrote:A vote for Ron Paul will ensure that BHO has another 4 years in the White House.
I do appreciate his success in business. Obama also has an impressive resume, but an impressive resume and whether or not someone has the ability to address the problems with this country are mutually exclusive. I do not feel Romney would eliminate any wasteful spending, government bureaucracies or any regulation.Tobias Fünke;1049359 wrote:I would think that an alumnus of the Fisher School would appreciate Romney's success in business and have confidence in his ability to turn the economy around by pinpointing and eliminating government bureaucracies, inefficiencies, and pointless/overbearing regulations.
So any successful business person makes a good president? That's all it takes?Tobias Fünke;1049359 wrote:I would think that an alumnus of the Fisher School would appreciate Romney's success in business and have confidence in his ability to turn the economy around by pinpointing and eliminating government bureaucracies, inefficiencies, and pointless/overbearing regulations.
No, but it's nearly a guarantee that someone with no business background will be a bad one.I Wear Pants;1049375 wrote:So any successful business person makes a good president? That's all it takes?
Not of actually accomplishing anything......sleeper;1049374 wrote:I do appreciate his success in business. Obama also has an impressive resume, but an impressive resume and whether or not someone has the ability to address the problems with this country are mutually exclusive. I do not feel Romney would eliminate any wasteful spending, government bureaucracies or any regulation.
Also, I'm very proud of the education I received at Fisher, but I fail to see why you seemingly invoke this at every discussion that we have. The education I received there has allowed me to secure an excellent job and sets me up well for any future endeavors that I might encounter.
So Reagan was a bad president?queencitybuckeye;1049409 wrote:No, but it's nearly a guarantee that someone with no business background will be a bad one.
I guess you're right, graduating from Harvard Law is not an accomplishment.wkfan;1049410 wrote:Not of actually accomplishing anything......
He had business experience...the business of running the State of California.sleeper;1049418 wrote:So Reagan was a bad president?
Lots of people graduate from lots of impressive places.sleeper;1049421 wrote:I guess you're right, graduating from Harvard Law is not an accomplishment.
If you're going to make government experience a proxy for business experience, then Obama has business experience too.wkfan;1049424 wrote:He had business experience...the business of running the State of California.
Interesting that you are now changing it from "What has he accomplished?" to now "What has he done with it?". You've already made up your mind, there's nothing I can do to convince you otherwise. Every point I bring up you will just counter with another question because you're already engrained in your position. I cannot help you if you don't think Obama has accomplished anything.wkfan;1049426 wrote:Lots of people graduate from lots of impressive places.
What has he actually done with it??
he does now...but had none prior to coming to the White House......unless you count his predominance of 'present' votes.sleeper;1049434 wrote:If you're going to make government experience a proxy for business experience, then Obama has business experience too.
Look, I'm not defending Obama. I think he's a terrible president and I really do not want him to have another 4 more years at running this country into the ground. But I truly believe that Romney will change nothing so what's the point?
OK...how about this. What has BHO accomplished with his Harvard degree?sleeper;1049436 wrote:Interesting that you are now changing it from "What has he accomplished?" to now "What has he done with it?". You've already made up your mind, there's nothing I can do to convince you otherwise. Every point I bring up you will just counter with another question because you're already engrained in your position. I cannot help you if you don't think Obama has accomplished anything.
How about President of the United States of America? Apparently that is not an accomplishment in your eyes.wkfan;1049446 wrote:OK...how about this. What has BHO accomplished with his Harvard degree?
You can try to spin it any way that you like...BHO has not 'accomplshed' much of anything.
