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

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


Since Ron Paul is hypothetically out of this conversation, and I had to pick between the two.......

I wouldn't pick either and write in Ron Paul!!!

GO RON PAUL!!!




posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by karileigh
 
I am with you RP as a write in if it comes down to Newt or Mitt, Newt would drop the nuke Mitt would sell it.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   
If I had to choose between either one of them, I would stay home. Ron Paul is the only decent Republican candidate left.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Okay fine, in the spirit of not trolling the thread...if I had to pick between poop sandwich or diarrhea sandwich...

I pick poop sandwich.
edit on 26-1-2012 by PaxVeritas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by BagOfDrewshness
 


*sigh*

The reason RP has been 'excluded' from this thread is because this website is overwhelmingly pro-RP. Such a thread would only serve to confirm what we already know, which is RP is the overwhelmingly popular choice here.

If I went on a pro-Newt forum and posted the question "If you hade to vote for Mitt or Paul (no Newt supporters), you would all be the first to criticise the closemindedness of people replying "Newt all the way" or "lool...Newt is the obvious choice"

It's a real shame that RP supporters feel the need to sully his name by hijacking this thread to antagonise readers who actually wanted to see who is more popular, on ATS (Newt or Mitt).



Exactly right. This I have tried to explain multiple times, but I guess I am a racist, bigot who is a government shill. Oh How I love Ron Paul supporteres!



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   
OH and this thread isn't about writing in Ron Paul either. I want to hear thoughts about Newt or Mitt. What if Ron Paul wasn't running? How about that one?



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

Originally posted by karileigh
Ron Paul!!!!


You clearly cannot read the post can you?


No, that post just went over your head is all. Ever heard of a write in vote?

Just because we are given two choices doesn't mean we only have two choices.

Id do a write in for Ron Paul. Would he get voted into office as a write in? Most likely no, but id vote for him because that is who I think is best suited for the job, at this moment.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

Originally posted by karileigh
Ron Paul!!!!


You clearly cannot read the post can you?


No, that post just went over your head is all. Ever heard of a write in vote?

Just because we are given two choices doesn't mean we only have two choices.

Id do a write in for Ron Paul. Would he get voted into office as a write in? Most likely no, but id vote for him because that is who I think is best suited for the job, at this moment.


And you really think a write in vote can win? Wow!!!! As i've said before. Brainwashed. When was the last time a write-in ever won an election???



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   
If its between Mitt or Newt, I won't vote. What a bunch of dolts they have running against Obama, and in such critical times! Its astounding.

I vote for Ron Paul-- or no one. Only Ron, Go Ron!

I think Obama will win again, because the opposing side has no one except Ron Paul and his chances are slim.

But, Maybe, Maybe something extraordinary could happen, will happen, can happen and Ron could become the nominee! And then win!!

I shall keep my optimism, just in case positive thinking really works!



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 



This is solely for republicans not supporting Ron Paul and for those not voting for Obama.

That rather narrows down the respondent pool....
I have until last year been a registered Independent. In order to have access to the Repub Primaries, I switched to Repub. I will NOT vote for Obama, no matter what.

So, if Ron Paul does not make it to the ballot at all, I will not vote. First time in 25 years. I won't vote. If he makes it as a 3rd party nominee, I will vote for him, and hope to high heaven he splits the vote for Obama and Whoever and WINS.

Newt or Romney? God help us all. Neither, please.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by PaxVeritas
Okay fine, in the spirit of not trolling the thread...if I had to pick between poop sandwich or diarrhea sandwich...

I pick poop sandwich.
edit on 26-1-2012 by PaxVeritas because: (no reason given)


LOL. Um, I'd go hungry.
Just saying.

Not sure what the OP wants except for opinions by those who don't want Obama OR Ron Paul. As for write-ins, or 3rd party candidates, they DO have a chance to win: if the votes that would go to one or the other Dem or Rep, if there was no third choice, HAVE a third choice, and choose it, then the other two lose by virtue of the 3rd party or write-in having siphoned off enough votes from BOTH to win.

EDIT TO ADD:
Maybe the OP has been offered a campaign directorship by both, and he's trying to choose between the lesser of two crap bosses. My advice....Run, and keep running.
edit on 26-1-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by macaronicaesar

You're looking for supporters of Mitt and Newt, but there aren't any.
edit on 26-1-2012 by macaronicaesar because: (no reason given)


There are quite a few actually on here that DO support Mitt and Newt like me. So saying there are none is politically incorrect and just plain wrong! That's who I wanted to find, and I did find some. Read the other posts if you don't believe me. Now get off your Ron Paul pedestal and go some place else



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by macaronicaesar
It's a stupid question. I would write Paul in, which is my right, and I have a right to express that right. Paul threads get hijacked everyday by the Outkast searchers of the world. This isn't a hijack, it's an opinion, and my opinion is that voting for either Newt or Romney is the equivalent of throwing your vote down the toilet. If you're that naive to support one of these two clowns, that's on you.

You're looking for supporters of Mitt and Newt, but there aren't any.
edit on 26-1-2012 by macaronicaesar because: (no reason given)


Evidently there are supporters for both.

Have you ever stopped to wonder that the odious garbage you just spouted against both men is precisely what you criticise the MSM, RP-haters and other 'sheeple' for?

Can you please be respectful of those who - shock - may not want to vote for who you want to vote for?

I think that naivety would be the idea that there couldn't possibly be another option to the one you believe in.

I'm sure Mr. Paul would be very disappointed to see your comments.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by ComeFindMe
 


You seem to have misunderstood me.

Please read my previous posts.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


I am focusing on the future not the past. Who will be the best person to help our economy, in a practical manner. I do not believe that Ron Paul will ever get his ideas to pass the senate and the house, especially since he will veto everything he disagrees with. Which appears to be a lot! If he doesn't compromise, they won't compromise and that will be worse than Obama, because Obama at least promised to compromise and everyone ate that up!

So I think Newt will be good for the economy as he has done so under reagan and clinton which many on both sides believe to be the best presidents in modern day memory!


See, I disagree. I think compromise is what got us in this debt problem, and what destroyed our education system, and what destroyed our torts and our legal system, and what is crushing the corrections system.

I don't think we've ever had a politician that didn't compromise enough, quite the opposite. They are all more than willing to compromise if it makes their existence in DC a little easier, and if it can be spun to help with re-election.

We have to vote for somebody that will refuse to compromise. 4 years of Vetos and dead-lock would be a vast improvement over 4 years of compromise.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   
Since the thread title/objective has changed I will respond with:


Neither...Having to choose between Newt or Mitt for me is much like having to chose between stabbing yourself in the face with a fork or killing millions of innocent people.

Abstract analogy incoming:

Of course the obvious better choice is to stab your face with a fork, however that was a choice that didn't HAVE to be made. Now i'm left here with a fork in my face because someone made me feel like I HAD to make a decision instead of just opting out of the absurd options in the first place.

At least sitting here with a fork in my face gives me the moral high ground right? I can feel justified because I made a conscious choice to stab myself in the face with a fork instead of kill millions of people...right??

Forced choices aren't real choices; they are subtle ways at manipulating people into positions or stances they otherwise would not hold. Then, even though they were forced into these positions/stances they will continue to defend these positions because the ego can't handle being "wrong".

When asked why they stabbed themselves in the face with a fork, they reply with "Well, at least I didn't kill millions of people!" As if they truly believe millions of people would have died if they didn't stab their face with a fork...

When asked why they would chose either of those horrible options they say "I was told I have to"...
Abstract analogy end:

A choice for Mitt or Newt is a forced choice for me. I won't make it because I don't believe I have to. I can't willingly support that which I don't support simply because someone tried to tell me "I had to" because those were my only options. Its all an illusory choice and I won't perpetuate it by participating in it.

edit on 26-1-2012 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-1-2012 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
OH and this thread isn't about writing in Ron Paul either. I want to hear thoughts about Newt or Mitt. What if Ron Paul wasn't running? How about that one?


He is, so your question is pointless. Inform yourself and if you still decide newt or mitt are right for you, you get what you deserve.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

And you really think a write in vote can win? Wow!!!! As i've said before. Brainwashed. When was the last time a write-in ever won an election???


Things seem to just go right over your head, don't they? NO, I don't think a write in vote can win .

Here, I will help you out. THIS is what I said.


Would he get voted into office as a write in? Most likely no, but id vote for him because that is who I think is best suited for the job, at this moment.


No, I don't think a write in vote can win. Which is why I said what I did.


I don't think a write in vote will win, but just because we are given two choices by the powers that be, does not mean we have only two choices. I am going to vote for who I think will be best suited for the job. I will NOT waste my vote on some one that I think will bring more of the same crap.

Id rather waste it on who I think is best suited for the job.


Side note, There is a major difference between differing opinions and brainwashed.
edit on 26-1-2012 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ComeFindMe

Originally posted by macaronicaesar
It's a stupid question. I would write Paul in, which is my right, and I have a right to express that right. Paul threads get hijacked everyday by the Outkast searchers of the world. This isn't a hijack, it's an opinion, and my opinion is that voting for either Newt or Romney is the equivalent of throwing your vote down the toilet. If you're that naive to support one of these two clowns, that's on you.

You're looking for supporters of Mitt and Newt, but there aren't any.
edit on 26-1-2012 by macaronicaesar because: (no reason given)


Evidently there are supporters for both.

Have you ever stopped to wonder that the odious garbage you just spouted against both men is precisely what you criticise the MSM, RP-haters and other 'sheeple' for?

Can you please be respectful of those who - shock - may not want to vote for who you want to vote for?

I think that naivety would be the idea that there couldn't possibly be another option to the one you believe in.

I'm sure Mr. Paul would be very disappointed to see your comments.


There is no other option. I don't accuse the msm of anything. They are what they are, I prefer not to watch CNN/Fox news, if I wanted to be fed a bunch of BS I would watch Romney debate Gingrich. Neither of which have a chance against Obama, the whole thing is a joke. Paul won't get in, there is no doubt about that, but the question is why are those in power so scared of that. Why do Newt and Mitt receive large donations from Goldman Sachs? If you don't care about that, that's your problem, you should.

You have the illusion of choice, there is no choice, there is no difference in either party and Mitt, Newt and Obama are one of the same.




new topics
top topics
 
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join