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.

 

Newt or Mitt who would you vote for if it came down to those two for the nomination?

page: 12
6
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
I would like this question answered from all the Paulites.

What makes you think Ron Paul can do all the things he said? What makes you think he ISN"T a corrupt politician? What makes you think he is sooo much better than Romney or Newt? Ok that's like three questions.

Newt and Romney will get the nomination. This is already final! Just look at how paul is doing in the polls, not opinions, factual polls. Third place iowa, third place SC, fourth place florida. The man is a loser and all of you sticking with him this time around will be very disappointed when he doesn't win this time. Why stick with a loosing team? Are Herman Cain's followers still writing him in? well maybe about 50 people. Ron Paul is too extreme, as in not normal GOP.

Again, this thread is about newt or mitt because that's what it will come down to. I'm calling it now!


Because Ron Paul has made some very serious promises that are drastic and are impossible to go unnoticed. A year goes by with him as president and we still have fema camps someone will put him down just for being full of #.




posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   
Between Newt or Mitt? I'd either write-in myself, of Nonov Theabove, or just vote for Obama, and finish burning this baby to the ground to see what crawls out of the ash heap.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Newt's a Washington insider. Mitt isn't. Mitt has accomplishments way above and beyond politics. Newt doesn't. Mitt is a decent (maybe too decent, according to some
) guy, and loyal family man. Newt is a bludgeoning tyrant and serial adulterer, which makes him completely untrustworthy in my opinion.

Now, I'd vote for either of them over Obama, but I'd prefer Mitt if he and Newt are the two choices.

Both Harvard guys, as is Obama. At least there's no Skull and Bones guy in the race at this point.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by xavi1000



This guy has my vote!!!!
Who is his vice president?



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
I would like this question answered from all the Paulites.

What makes you think Ron Paul can do all the things he said?


What makes you think anybody can do all the things they say? I could ask the same of you about Newt or Schmidt. Presidential powers are supposed to be limited in this country. The main objective is to elect somebody who has the right principles and will follow the rules


What makes you think he ISN"T a corrupt politician?

Follow the money


Newt and Romney will get the nomination.

Huh? Both of them? Interesting..


This is already final! Just look at how paul is doing in the polls, not opinions, factual polls. Third place iowa, third place SC, fourth place florida.
funny how you don't mention 2nd in New Hampshire..


The man is a loser and all of you sticking with him this time around will be very disappointed when he doesn't win this time. Why stick with a loosing team?

Are you familiar with the practice of integrity? Conviction perhaps? Has it ever occurred to you that those of us who support Ron Paul might actually believe in his message, and aren't willing to settle for anything less? How could anybody criticize that?


Ron Paul is too extreme, as in not normal GOP.

Good. That's why I like him


Again, this thread is about newt or mitt because that's what it will come down to. I'm calling it now!

That's fine. Enjoy your servitude



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrDesolate
Newt's a Washington insider. Mitt isn't. Mitt has accomplishments way above and beyond politics. Newt doesn't. Mitt is a decent (maybe too decent, according to some
) guy, and loyal family man. Newt is a bludgeoning tyrant and serial adulterer, which makes him completely untrustworthy in my opinion.

Now, I'd vote for either of them over Obama, but I'd prefer Mitt if he and Newt are the two choices.

Both Harvard guys, as is Obama. At least there's no Skull and Bones guy in the race at this point.


So, you are comparing 3 Harvard Guys, all rich, all very out of touch with reality, all supported by their respective handlers and political parties, and all hyped up by the MSM, and all with major connections to all of the economic fiascos that are on-going, from Freddie and Fannie, to GM and Bailouts.........

And you are comparing them like there is some difference? Does it really matter which of these 3 get elected? Will there be any significant change?

They are 3 interchangeable Pawns. They are Pawns that have crossed the board, paid their dues, and are now ready to pose as Kings, but they have nothing unique to offer.

This is precisely the type of thinking the establishment depends on, and spend millions, maybe billions to keep alive.

This is precisely the reason Ron Paul is the only answer.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I would vote for Romney before I would Newt, but I don't plan on voting for either of them.
Romney is not as agressive, he seems like he'd be better at negotiating.

I've decided I'm voting for Ron Paul, even if I have to write him in.
edit on 27-1-2012 by hadriana because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Ron Paul isn't polling very well.

Bill O'Reilly says Ron Paul has zero chance of winning.

Stossel said he is not so sure. Bill O'Reilly said "Wanna bet?" Stossel said "No."




posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
I think Newt is definitely the unapologetic hateful cold neocon Republicans yearn for. Everything about him is a contradiction to what good people stand for, which is just what Republicans are attracted to. He's a family values guy... who's own personal indiscretions are off limits. He's a money-chasing lobbyist who's going to change Washington. He goes wherever benefits himself most and says F you when you question him on it. Perfect. Give that guy the keys...



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 




Ya, I wouldn't bet on it either! His chances are obviously slim to none. It looks like Newt is going to win Florida.

Several months ago, I laid out this scenario. I said TPTB, and the shot-callers want Obama in office, and if they can't have that, they want another puppet. They put up Romney and Perry as those puppets, and they hyped the hell out of them. Newt was in the game, as a sleeper, he was the company man, and the Plan B if they needed him, but he served as comic relief for awhile. He was making quips, engaging the crowd, attacking the debate moderators, and giving Romney and Perry their time to shine.

So, what happened? Perry bombed out quick, and Cain, Paul, Bachmann, Huntsman were pulling too many voters. So they crushed Cain, Bachmann dropped out, Huntsman is surely lobbying for a Sec of State position, so he dropped and endorsed Romney, but even after all of that Romney was still struggling, so NEWT EMERGES! Like a Phoenix! Newt suddenly surges in the polls, gets all the press coverage, starts taking the debates seriously, and steals the limelight.

From the start, it was going to be Obama, Romney, or Perry, with Newt as their Plan B!



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   
When it comes down to those two, like it's sure to do, I'll be voting Newt.
He likes to party. I like to party. We both like to party.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 




Ya, I wouldn't bet on it either! His chances are obviously slim to none. It looks like Newt is going to win Florida.

Several months ago, I laid out this scenario. I said TPTB, and the shot-callers want Obama in office, and if they can't have that, they want another puppet. They put up Romney and Perry as those puppets, and they hyped the hell out of them. Newt was in the game, as a sleeper, he was the company man, and the Plan B if they needed him, but he served as comic relief for awhile. He was making quips, engaging the crowd, attacking the debate moderators, and giving Romney and Perry their time to shine.

So, what happened? Perry bombed out quick, and Cain, Paul, Bachmann, Huntsman were pulling too many voters. So they crushed Cain, Bachmann dropped out, Huntsman is surely lobbying for a Sec of State position, so he dropped and endorsed Romney, but even after all of that Romney was still struggling, so NEWT EMERGES! Like a Phoenix! Newt suddenly surges in the polls, gets all the press coverage, starts taking the debates seriously, and steals the limelight.

From the start, it was going to be Obama, Romney, or Perry, with Newt as their Plan B!


It will all be over on Tuesday but man are they throwing EVERYTHING at Newt!

They are digging up Golden Oldies from the 1980s!


Newt is doing well nationwide according to the WSJ today.

BTW, Newt has an endorsement from Senator Fred Thompson.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


Ya, that is the part that puzzles me. Romney and Newt are being awfully heated with one another, and that doesn't support my puppet theory very well!
But, it does help Obama a whole lot, and I believe he is the chosen one, so perhaps TPTB are just letting them slug it out?

What I don't understand, is why this doesn't all benefit Paul more? I know he isn't as engaging as the others, and I know his message is sometimes lost when he fumbles for words, but he still has the best overall platform on the stage to benefit the common person, so why are we so impressionable to be shuffled from pillar to post as Newt and Romney trade blows? Why not just unhitch and walk on over to Paul?



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Newt G, so much more intelligent and entertaining to watch him speak and he seems like a bull dog with THICK SKIN... : )



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
For my part, I won't be voting in the primaries since I am registered as an Independant, but to clarify: at this point in my life I am unwilling to continue to settle for "the best of two poor options" anymore. When it comes to national elections, I plan to opt out altogether.

I've come to believe that the change one craves starts at the local level... bottom up, not top down. The average "joe" needs to pay more attention to local and state elections if they want anything to "change" in their favor.


edit on 27-1-2012 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by karileigh
 


Do you know how to read...? The poster said Mitt or Newt, not Obama or RP, a vote for RP is a vote for Obama anyway.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Eurisko2012
 


Ya, that is the part that puzzles me. Romney and Newt are being awfully heated with one another, and that doesn't support my puppet theory very well!
But, it does help Obama a whole lot, and I believe he is the chosen one, so perhaps TPTB are just letting them slug it out?

What I don't understand, is why this doesn't all benefit Paul more? I know he isn't as engaging as the others, and I know his message is sometimes lost when he fumbles for words, but he still has the best overall platform on the stage to benefit the common person, so why are we so impressionable to be shuffled from pillar to post as Newt and Romney trade blows? Why not just unhitch and walk on over to Paul?


Polling shows the general public is waiting for someone completely new.

If the unemployment rate jumps back over 9%, i can easily see Hillary arriving on the
scene. She is polling better than Obama against ALL of the GOP candidates.

When that happens we will also pull a rabbit out of our hat.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by marinesniper0351
Newt G, so much more intelligent and entertaining to watch him speak and he seems like a bull dog with THICK SKIN... : )


He is so good that the MSM wants to gag the audience!

No more cheering!



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
And you are comparing them like there is some difference? Does it really matter which of these 3 get elected? Will there be any significant change?


Yes, I think it matters. The President isn't a dictator. The amount of change effected will be to a great degree, determined by the makeup of both houses of the legislature.

I know it's a popular refrain to disregard the mainstream candidates like there's some invisible string puller somewhere who ultimately controls everything and the outcome doesn't matter. And if that sort of a simplistic world view helps some sleep at night, then there isn't anything I can do about it.


This is precisely the reason Ron Paul is the only answer.


But he was eliminated as a choice by the author of the thread. I think it's only polite to honor a simple request like that, if I'm going to participate. There are eleventy zillion RP threads where the Paulites can wax poetic about their dream guy. Is it so unreasonable to try to have a discussion about the other options without dragging Paul into it? Just one? I know it's way too late for this thread, and I'm confident the answer is "no", so consider it a rhetorical question to be considered without responding to it.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by MrDesolate
 



Is it so unreasonable to try to have a discussion about the other options without dragging Paul into it? Just one? I know it's way too late for this thread, and I'm confident the answer is "no", so consider it a rhetorical question to be considered without responding to it.


It's not unreasonable, it is just inaccurate and boring.

A bunch of responses stating "Neither," or a thread sitting in the halls of ATS with 5 responses is not very conducive to a "discussion forum."

All the Ron Paul threads bug me as much as anybody, so I get the reasoning behind the request, but it doesn't make for much of a discussion does it?

Even without some secret string puller dancing all the front-runners to their own agenda, do you really see a significant difference between the 3, rich, entrenched, Harvard guys? Is there really any reason to pick one over another? Honest question, without even naming the alternatives, what difference does it make if you pick door A, B, or C, if they all open to the same 2-party government of compromises and mediocrity?



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join