It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why Mitt Romney Will NEVER Be President.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by joey_hv
*sigh*
white people should really stop trying to be hip-hop.


Really? Like this guy:

media.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 
Yess!! exactly, that is another good example o why white people should stick to country music. No offense, some of my best friends are white.



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by joey_hv
 


You have a u2u, so we don't jack this thread.



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by joey_hv
 


I think the problem with Romney is two fold. Remember that Romney was governor of a relatively liberal state of north, and in that sense had to often step out of the conservative line to get voted in governor and maintain support from New England progressives. Romney has stated in the past his belief that global warming was an issue, he also supported a ban on assualt weapons (correct me if Im wrong) and on many occasions supported mandating insurance (state regulation). These are just the few issues of where Romney had tried to compromise with his voter block in his own state, but where he had walked out of what would be the limitations of conservative preferences.

Another issue that many conservatives may not wish to admit themselves his Romneys religious upbringing. We already saw this example Obama, not being a muslim himself but merely due to his ancesteral heritage, and his middle name, brought out accusations he was muslim from conservatives. The same could happen to Romney. Romney is a mormon, and this will conflict dearly with social evangelical conservatives who are a powerful block among the conservative populous. Evangelicals vote with the their church, not necessarily with the political issues facing the nation. Romney obviously falls under a religion that opposes the platform of christianity, and this will cause this voting block to go against Romney. To be honest I dont Romney is even that much of a faithful mormon, personally I felt he was agnostic, but this still wont change the fact that evangelicals will see him as a threat to their way of being.

Lastly, the fact that Romney had flip flopped numerous times is another issue. Its true that the vast majority of politicians and presidents have been caugh flip flopping and to me its sort of a given to every politican atleast once. However Romney seems to have had more of his hypocrisies exposed over the years... I dont know whether its just bad luck or whether he tends to flip more than others, but he was exposed plenty of times during the campaign, and likewise there is only so much times it can be acceptable before crossing the line.



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by expat2368
There are only two politicians in the entire country that should be elected again to anything..

Sara Palin and Ron Paul

The rest of them are just liars, cheats, and thieves...

All of them need to be thrown out and a few need to be tried for treason.


Don't forget Dennis Kucinich...... I'm proud to say he's from my state, Ohio. I just wish he represented my area. lol

As far as Mitt Romney goes, I did a lot of research on him during the run-up to the last election, and there is NO WAY I would ever vote for him for president. Even a few of the people who were running his fundraising, and involved in his campaign had questionable backgrounds.

A lot of people like him because they think with his business background, he would have a better idea of what to do to turn the economy around, but he is more of a destroyer, than a fixer. A person who is successful in business by making himself rich at the expense of others is not the type of person we need in the office of president. We have had enough of that.

AND....I DO think he is very much a part of the LDS church, he is from a generational family that is big in the leadership (from what I can remember of the research I did) and I believe he did two years of missionary work for the church as well. He also had some leadership roles in the church.

The LDS church has some very interesting background and history. I read up on it when I was looking into Romney. Some of the information I came across from former members was thought provoking, and rather scary. The ultimate goal of LDS leadership for many years has been to get a Mormon into the office of President. If you check it out, there are a few influential Mormons already in Washington DC, such as Harry Reid......just biding their time and also in the secret services like the CIA and FBI. Considering their numbers in the general population, they may even be a bit disproportionately represented in those areas.

The Mormon religion is probably one of the most aggressive there is as far as trying to convert people, and a cultlike control of the members is common. Their leadership's stated goal is to convert the whole earth. What better way to accomplish that goal, than to have *one of your own* in the most influential position there is. Presidents have a good deal of influence on national policy.

Mitt Romney would like everyone to THINK he is lukewarm about his Mormon faith, and that he would be able to make decisions without considering the church's teachings, but according to what I have read, that would not be possible for one with his background.



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by sezsue
 

I have not researched his spiritual beliefs since I do not think a man should be judged for their religious beliefs IN THIS COUNTRY which was founded on religious freedom.
Having said that, you are probably correct on it being an issue for him since such a large population is downright scared of the mormon religion.



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


Well he is defintley a man of the dogs and dogs are owned by people so in a roundabout way i suppose you are correct!!


I jest, he has enough money to run again so i'm sure he will give it another bash in 2012. Less of a maniac than Palin and Cheney which is always a bonus.

[edit on 27-12-2009 by Peruvianmonk]



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by joey_hv
reply to post by sezsue
 

I have not researched his spiritual beliefs since I do not think a man should be judged for their religious beliefs IN THIS COUNTRY which was founded on religious freedom.
Having said that, you are probably correct on it being an issue for him since such a large population is downright scared of the mormon religion.




I believe in the free expression of faith, and I don't believe a person's faith should cause them to be discriminated against.

That said, everything that may have influenced a person running for president should be looked at. When it comes to a person's faith, or the religion they practice, it does have a big influence. Especially his particular religion.

I consider myself a christian, in the sense that I believe in Jesus Christ, not that I follow any one particular *religion* anymore. (former Catholic)

But, I could not have voted for Barak Obama, who claims to be a christian either, because, amongst many other reasons, he attended the church of Jeremiah Wright for 20 years, and if that wasn't enough, he later tried to say he never noticed all the controversial things being espoused in the church! LOL

This makes him either a liar, or someone who appears to be too clueless to be president. IMHO


(I didn't vote for GWB either. Either time....)

[edit on 27-12-2009 by sezsue]



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by joey_hv
reply to post by sezsue
 

I have not researched his spiritual beliefs since I do not think a man should be judged for their religious beliefs IN THIS COUNTRY which was founded on religious freedom.
Having said that, you are probably correct on it being an issue for him since such a large population is downright scared of the mormon religion.


You guys make good points but I think that society is beginning to get past religious ideology that we are raised with. Hopefully.

I still haven't seen a better candidate. Please point one out to me. Not Paul(no hope in hell) or Palin(no hope in hell pt. 2).



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

I still haven't seen a better candidate. Please point one out to me. Not Paul(no hope in hell) or Palin(no hope in hell pt. 2).


Unfortunately you are probably right about no hope in hell for R.P. but...

unfortunately you are probably wrong about S.P. there is much love for this badass hunting momma out there. I am worried she may try to run on an independent ticket and take points from a valid Repub candidate.

I am also worried that she knows this and she will use this to blackmail the repubs into backing her.


How would you feel about a Romney/Palin ticket.?

She may nullify his negatives to alot of people.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by joey_hv
How would you feel about a Romney/Palin ticket.?

She may nullify his negatives to alot of people.


Only if she learns to play with the big boys. She's too green for Washington. She has time.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


She is too green. She should run for Senate, or the House, first. Exposure, some experience running with the big dogs, but not too much. Her attraction to voters is that she hasn't turned into one of "them"...

Romney? This is a familiar topic, 'trep...didn't we have this conversation a few days ago?

I agree, he's a much better choice then anyone currently on the radar for the GOP...though obviously, Palin will have lots of supporters. I don't think she even runs...but don't be surprised if she does a bit of "kingmaking" on the side. She's a force to be reckoned with, do not disregard her. The GOP and the Dems do so at their own peril. Like it or not, she's a force now.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
You mean the same McCain that was seen as the savior of the GOP before the election and accused of being a liberal after? McCain was a joke. Palin was a sacrificial joke. Romney isn't a joke. If the GOP wants to elevate itself to the WH anytime soon they are going to have to stop the infighting. Learn compromise within itself and do it NOW!!!


Was McCain a joke during the election? after the election? or two years before the election? If memory serves, McCain was the next great bipartisan hope long before he became the joke. He was nominated for his lack of being a joke in the beginning. No?



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


To many on the right he was a joke from the get go...and they were proven correct in retrospect.

To me, and I swing to the right of center on most issues, he came across as too willing to subsume his core values for the "greater" good... What ever that was...'cause he was so busy trying to offend no one, he offended everyone and got blown out...

It's one thing to step back from a value to accomplish a good thing. It's quite another to be so consumned with being inoffensive you forget those values... Coming across as a vacillating flip flopper never bodes well. Our current vacillating President as a prime example...another might be Jimmy Carter.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


So at least as far a. as 2006, all Republicans already thought McCain was a joke but then he got the nomination anyway because...?



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Its all good and fine-

I will point out that M R is a real elite, since that was such a big problem with BHO.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


All republicans are not the right of the party. There are, as McCain proves, moderates and, yes, even liberal Republicans (Snow, from Maine comes to mind). But the conservative branch of the GOP never really got behind him save in making gratuitous platitudes. That made the difference in the election, or certainly didn't help his cause any...

This is, of course, my opinion.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by Lillydale
 


All republicans are not the right of the party. There are, as McCain proves, moderates and, yes, even liberal Republicans (Snow, from Maine comes to mind). But the conservative branch of the GOP never really got behind him save in making gratuitous platitudes. That made the difference in the election, or certainly didn't help his cause any...

This is, of course, my opinion.


So what you are saying is that McCain had support of the party, just not all of it.

Mitt Romney has the support of the the party, just not all of it.

See why I am having a hard time with the huge difference in who is/was a joke and when?



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 



Mitt Romney has the support of the the party, just not all of it.


That's kinda hard to say at this early stage. It's really not all that certain he's going to run. Though I expect that he's certainly thinking about it...

Personally, I think the Republicans, and just for the sake of openness, I'm not one; should concentrate on getting back Congress, and not worry so much about the White House... But that's just me.


See why I am having a hard time with the huge difference in who is/was a joke and when?


It's all about perception. If you are perceived to be a joke, or weak, you are... At least in politics. Stand for what you believe. People will respect that. They may not vote for you, but they'll respect you. Vacillate, and the knives come out. McCain found that out, and so has President Obama. Perception is everything in politic. Rightly or wrongly, it's the way it works.

[edit on 12/28/2009 by seagull]



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Historically speaking, the GOP has a snowball's chance in Hades of getting a candidate elected to the Executive Branch for the next 12+ years.

That isn't to say, however, that it isn't impossible...just improbable, if history is any indicator.

However, if the GOP would like to prove historical trends incorrect and get a candidate elected, then they are going to have to turn their party around. They have always suffered an image problem, and the political madness that has happened in the past year alone has only acerbated that a hundred-fold. They not only have the challenge of finding the perfect candidate (whether or not he is Mitt Romney), but they have to clean up their image and distance themselves from the GOP Political Pundits that have dragged the GOP image through the mud, distance themselves from Palin, and distance themselves from the Far-Right Extremists. However, each of those things come at a cost as well. Those are voter segments that the GOP has come to rely upon. However, that's what needs to be done to woo back Moderates, Independents and Swing Voters.

Mitt Romney is a candidate that might not be a squeaky-clean Boy Scout, but he doesn't carry the tarnished image or foot-in-mouth scandalous potential that Palin does.

Regardless of who the GOP chooses to be their candidate in the 2012 Elections they are facing an uphill battle, and this battle cannot be won by using the same Rule Book they relied on in 2008. If the GOP hopes to sell their candidate to the people, they are going to have to play ball above-board without mud-slinging or relying on mass hysteria like they tried doing in 2008 or it is going to leave them in the same situation they are in now. Even those Obama supporters that have grown disillusioned with Obama aren't going to jump ship unless they are presented with a viable alternative that plays fair and shows that they are working for their better interests, not for political gain. The GOP really has to understand that 2012 isn't about gaining seats for their party, as much as it is restoring the image of their party in the minds of people...and realistically, it may take longer than 2012 for that to happen.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join