IMHO - TPTB are Shoving Mitt Romney Down Our Throats.

I say this because of circumstantial evidence - and a paranoid conspiracists mind.
True, this has lots of opinion and lots of conjecture but I think I"m probably right about it.

IMHO - The Powers That Be ... they have crowned Mitt Romney as the next POTUS. They are doing everything they can to steer the election in that direction.

Example - The 'Republican flavor of the month'. Average Republican Americans are really looking for someone other than Romney. He doesn't blow their hair back. The polls support this. Every time they come up with a candidate that they like more than Romney, suddenly something really negative comes out about the guy that really can't be proven, and then Romney ends up back on top again.

IMHO - This isn't a regular vette process thing, or those 'negative' things would have come out much earlier. Like Herman Cain and his alleged womanizing. Like Ron Paul and his alleged racism. Like Newt Gingrich and the avalanche of 'insider' and 'lobbiest monies' attacks against him. etc etc. ALL of this has been known for a long time, but it wasn't made a big deal until these people were topping Romney in the polls.

IMHO - It's not coming from Romney himself much. He hasn't got 'it' to be able to do it .. not like Hillary Clinton could. He hasn't got the machine in place to be able to dig up the negative like this.

IMHO - When Gov Chris Christy was asked to run for POTUS by Bush43 and by Nancy Reagan (and others), and he turned it down and endorsed Romney .. THAT was the clue. He was being handed the crown, and when he said he couldnt' do it, he then gave the crown to the next one indicated by TPTB. Betchya Chris Christy will be Vice President under Romney. He's now 'one of them'.

Chris Christie has endorsed Romney
John Thune has endorsed Romney
Senator Ayotte has endorsed Romney
Dan Quayle has endorsed Romney
Bob Dole has endorsed Romney
Nikki Haley has endorsed Romney

and the biggie ... George H.W. Bush unofficially endorses Romney
(don't be fooled by his age ... all sorts of deep conspiracy roads lead to Bush41 in the USA)

I have no solid evidence to show you that Romney is the crown prince of election 2012.
It's just my conjecture based on what I'm seeing.
And I think I'm seeing Carl Rove's shadow in all this ...

FLAME AWAY.

reply to post by FlyersFan


I don't swallow. I would advise we all do likewise.

Just my two cents worth.

No need to flame you. He is the only candidate that gets any respect or at least a pass on negative press.

I am pretty jaded so I think whoever "they" decide will be president, will be, but on the off chance we the people, do actually matter, I hope we get a third party candidate to vote for, I just can't vote for Rom or Obama.

Although in that scenario, something will happen and one of the two aforementioned will still win. So should I even vote?

This all just sucks. Just waiting now, for the coming revolution.

I wonder who the Log Cabin Republicans are going to support this year?

They have a real bad habit of shoving candidates down peoples throats.

ETA: Nevermind, I found out that The Log Cabin Republicans really like Rick Santorum for some reason and they are totally behind him.

Originally posted by Ittabena
I don't swallow. I would advise we all do likewise.

That's excellent! Seriously though ... it looks like Americans in general DO swallow what is shoved down their throats. Either that, or they buy into whatever gimmick the politician or the media is dishing out. The engineering of Mtt Romney to be POTUS (or at least the Republican nominee) seems obvious, at least to me it does.

There's still plenty time before Romney the mormon rear its ugly head.

Plenty of time indeed.

For Romney, Mormon question rears its ugly head in Iowa

I've thought the same thing - in fact, when several candidates failed to make the Virginia ballot, I had the thought they were so afraid that Romney wouldn't fly and that Paul would, that they had quit thinking about anything else.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Romney is NOT a Republican.. proof enough to me that he will be the one nominated. They desire another RHINO to carry on the Globalist agenda. We really don't have much of a choice either.. no other candidate has even the slightest possibility of being elected..

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

Romney is NOT a Republican.. proof enough to me that he will be the one nominated. They desire another RHINO to carry on the Globalist agenda. We really don't have much of a choice either.. no other candidate has even the slightest possibility of being elected..

Yep. If you're a conservative, you're pretty much screwed. I still don't think Romney will win the nomination; aside from the old money liberal Republicans in the northeast, no one likes him. Still, the alternatives aren't much better at all. At this point, I'm even giving serious consideration to voting for Ron Paul, not so much because I'm a fan, but because the rest of the field is so bad.

Unfortunately, Obama is going to win re-election rather easily.

reply to post by FlyersFan


I have no doubt that the Republican establishment prefer Mitt Romney Flyers Fan, but I hardly think this is a conspiracy. The republican big wigs and their billionaire donors are going to bet on the candidate they see best fit to run against Obama, and that does appear to be Mitt Romney, whether you like it or not.

Gingrich has too much baggage, and is clearly unpopular among independents

Ron Paul's policies isolate both sides of the politicalsphere, whether Paulers choose to admit it or not. His foreign policy has already gotten him low support from the religious pro-israel establishment whom whether we like it or not hold a crucial portion of the GOP vote. On the flip side his foreign policy is the only real part of him that appeal to liberals, but given his racist newsletters, they will bite in him the general elections. Considering he scores low points on both sides, Republicans would not want to risk him and understandably so.

John Huntsman? If this man ran against Obama he would most likely beat him out of all the other candidates, given his proximity to the center compared to the other candidates. He will gain more support outside the rightwing voting block, more with independents, but do you think the conservative voting block, most of whom are tea parties,will settle with Huntsman? Fat chance, they're too stubborn, they want their white knight of conservadom, and they ain't changing their minds or settling for 'barely conservative'.

Cain? His out, and he was never a serious enough contender anyway, just a gimmick for the time being.

Bachmann, she also scares independents, she also doesn't appear to come out as a strong contender on many of the issues. She doesn't offer anything to make her stand out from the rest of the field.

Perry? Yep, too much baggage, too many flops, forget it.

That leaves us with Mitt, whom was once governor of Massachusetts and will probably win that state again. Will probably win New Hampshire as well over Obama. He will be viewed as the more moderate conservative aside from Huntsman out of them all, he appears to appeal with independents more so out of the field, if we take Huntsman out of the equation. Mitt also has alot of support within the conservative base, the kind we don't often hear about, but the kind that has kept him at a steady high thus far. He has the money, he has the connections ,he also has the experience.

The Republican establishment and their donors are looking towards somebody who they see is most likely to win the primaries and then the general elections with the voters. You don't need to be part of 'The Powers to Be' to know this. Establishment republicans are just trying to invest their money wisely so that their agendas can be achieved. There are no shortages of stubborn voters in the conservative base who refuse to come to terms with the reality of these facts at the moment, but sooner or later they will have to come to terms with what's left by the end of the primaries next year.

I'm afraid you're right, FF...

Mitt Romney seems to be the consensus pick of the would be king makers...

I find it somewhat ironic that the Massachusetts liberal to fear isn't a Kennedy after all...and amusing. As has been said, Romey isn't anything even remotely resembling a conservative. ...and this is my own bias showing, and I admit this... I'm not all that thrilled that someone from the western half of the United States isn't showing better... Hell, I'd even take a California candidate, though that may be pushing it a little....

Here's an interesting alternative to Mitt...

Gary Johnson

I can almost see a ticket, admittedly libertarian, that consists of Ron Paul (despite my reservations) and Gary Johnson.

Same thing was said POST W, but people came out and voting for him twice...
But I am not sure why tens of Millions of conservatives are so powerless. It will be
even more perplexing to watch the helpless lot vote for this guy regardless.

Is conservative a myth, like; the perfect person?

Seems to me progressives should be the least of "Conservative's" worries

reply to post by FlyersFan


Yes , I have noticed that to . I would rather Drink a Glassful of Epicap than even Consider Voting for such a " Shallow" Presidential Candidate as Mr. Romney .

reply to post by FlyersFan

I have no solid evidence to show you that Romney is the crown prince of election 2012.

Don't need it. It was evident after the first couple GOP "debates". Romney and Perry receive the most airtime. Perry was supposed to be the 'bad guy' and Romney the 'good guy'.

Look at some of the wording in the coverage.

Like here.

but it was a showdown driven largely by clashes between the two leading candidates in the race: Mitt Romney and Rick Perry.

This type of coverage and wording is used to influence people. Anyone in communications or marketing should be familiar.

It's sad how well it works.

But it has been clear from the get-go that Romney was the poster boy. I presume the ideal ticket for POTUS would be Romney as a front runner and Gingrich for VP.

Originally posted by seagull
I'm afraid you're right, FF...

Mitt Romney seems to be the consensus pick of the would be king makers...

I find it somewhat ironic that the Massachusetts liberal to fear isn't a Kennedy after all...and amusing. As has been said, Romey isn't anything even remotely resembling a conservative. ...and this is my own bias showing, and I admit this... I'm not all that thrilled that someone from the western half of the United States isn't showing better... Hell, I'd even take a California candidate, though that may be pushing it a little...

.

Here's an interesting alternative to Mitt...

Gary Johnson

I can almost see a ticket, admittedly libertarian, that consists of Ron Paul (despite my reservations) and Gary Johnson.

Gary Johnson scares TPTB even more than Paul does, he's just completely unknown and so no real threat.

If people think Paul brings in the youth votes, the liberals and independents, Gary Johnson would be a magnet.

Unfortunately, the man isn't the strongest of speakers.

reply to post by FlyersFan


I don't think it's really an opinion at this point. The media has been shoving Romney in peoples faces for months now, and very rarely is anything negative said about the fella whose campaign is being funded by the major financial institutions.

But the man who challenges the establishment on so many different levels is being attacked left and right, day after day.

I don't watch any mainstream media, but my parents are glued to CNN because I guess it makes them feel informed and sophisticated to watch it, and I see their political coverage. Lately, for the past couple of weeks, they've been framing the coverage around Romney and Gingrich.

No matter what the political story is, they always manage to tie them into it. There were debate questions given to other candidates about whether Romney or Gingrich had the better argument, and there were interview questions given to other candidates about whether they support Romney or Gingrich more.

Everything is about those two, because they are the puppets. That's the illusion of politics. People think they are going to promote fundamental change for the better by voting for one of the few candidates the media shoves in their faces, but that's far from the truth. They're all cut from the same cloth. They're the same rotten meat, but just marinated in different flavors of crap.

The first chapter in Ron Paul's book "The Revolution" does a great job of explaining the illusion of choice in American politics, and the silencing/blacking out of voices that challenge the status quo.

reply to post by TupacShakur

Everything is about those two, because they are the puppets. That's the illusion of politics. People think they are going to promote fundamental change for the better by voting for one of the few candidates the media shoves in their faces, but that's far from the truth. They're all cut from the same cloth. They're the same rotten meat, but just marinated in different flavors of crap.

VERY well said. I don't watch MSM either, but have a father who is glued to CNN and a mother who does what my father says. He's a staunch Republican christian conservative. Argh. There's no talking to those types. Older, set in their ways, and blind to the truth. They vote the Republican ticket faithfully, year after year, no matter who the candidate is. My own father is a puppet controlled by MSM. Double Argh.

However, my father hates Romney because he's Mormon. He'd NEVER vote for him because of his religious views. To date, I was over at his house for the holidays, yet I forgot to ask him who he's picking this election.

reply to post by Druid42


Yeah some people really can't wrap their minds around some of the things wrong with our society, like the controlled media or politics. I think the OP is dead on though, the media is setting us up for Romney/Obama 2012. Since the main source of political information for probably half of Americans is TV and mainstream media, they will just follow the herd and vote for whoever they're basically told to.

I do think it's pretty likely that some of the other candidates, even if they get negative coverage, are on the same puppet-team as Robomney. Herman Cain was the chairman of the KC Fed.....yeah that guy was definitely corrupt. He was a nice distraction from serious political discourse for a few weeks though!

Newt Gingrich was on the CFR, which plays a role in the controlling of the media, because lots of the media moguls, CEOs and other powerful officials meet through it. So I think he was corrupt too. Maybe he's there to lose too, but seem like a viable candidate for the time being. If his insider money business won't convince people to not vote for him, I'm sure the media will start hammering him with cheating on his wife or something like that, if that's what "the plan" is.

Look at how similar those clowns are at the core. Which one of them supports ending the Fed and backing our currency by gold so it can't be inflated, ending all of the wars and having a foreign policy of peace and diplomacy, allowing citizens to fully exercise their Constitutional rights and live freely, and follow the Constitution top to bottom as he's done for his entire political career? What about ending the Drug War, or scrapping all of these Orwellian security measures like the Patriot Act, TSA, and other things that have resulted from 9/11?

They're all a bunch of phonies who don't have very many major ideological differences, at least in what I see as the important areas. So when one guy comes along and has different ideas that neither political party has endorsed since people have been alive, some people hear a position of his like closing 5 government departments, and think he's obviously not a serious choice. I mean come on, the media explicitly tells viewers that all of the time, and the media doesn't talk about many of the things that he does.

I've got a challenge, spend 5 minutes searching for negative media coverage of Ron Paul, then do the same for Romney. I'll be astounded if any of the corporate media gives any negative coverage all.

Do a little digging on the web, find some dirt and post it all over the place

reply to post by SpectreDC


No he's not. which is a problem when running for high office. But damn, I like his attitude, and his ideas. ...and unlike Ron Paul, he doesn't leave me wondering what his game really is...