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: 7
6
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


The only vote that I will make will be for Ron Paul! Even if I have to write it in!




posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by karileigh
Ron Paul!!!!


Took the worlds right out of my mouth.. Everyone that supports him should give one last try with the write-in vote in the event that he isn't the republican candidate and decided to not run as a third-party.

I know it may sound hopeless but technically if enough people have lost faith in either party, we should be able to outnumber those that still believe Romney or Obama will make things better.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   
none. so i can sleep with a good conscious knowing i'm not responsible for the blood bath they'll bring to the middle east.


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



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by 35Foxtrot
 


Go back and reread there have been three that have said they would vote for Obama.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dance4Life
Ron Paul people are brainwashed? omfg lol

Look in the mirror often?


I'm fairly certain that anybody who identifies with another persons positions or stances on any issue can be labeled as being brainwashed....

As far as the question goes... for the nomination, and Ron Paul didn't exist? I'd have to go with Newt for sure. The only thing that pushes me away from Newt is his entire stance on foreign relations, and the use of military.

But, I must ask... Why the question in the form of extremes?
I understand that the role of GOP nomination is the key to anybody successfully putting up a challenge in the coming election, but that doesn't mean that it's the 'holy grail' of keys to victory. We can sit here all day and go through the historical accounts and stories of how certain people came to having the Oval Office, but the fact of the matter is... times are changing.

I'm placing Ron Paul's name on any form of ballot in which he is eligible for, period. I used to be a 'party-lines' type of person, not so long ago... I even supported Obama. Luckily I found a true knowledge of history, philosophy and sociology, and now understand that what Obama is doing, is exactly opposite of what needs to transpire in order for whole of humanity across all boarders to find freedom.

I don't, by any means, regret the way I supported Obama, for I believe that it was a necessary evil, or wake up call to all of the citizens, not only in the US, but the world alike. All politicians offer promises that can be equated to gold or fake/fools gold. It's no longer enough to just point out the failures of others, nor the failure of any said institution or program in place. The true nature of picking a candidate that will benefit the whole, is identifying the solutions that have been presented.

Knowing that Ron Paul can not possibly live up to all of the solutions in which he has presented, is humbling. It lets me know that another Hitler can not just waltz into the office, and then change the entire agenda of the constitution. Even though many presidents have walk all over the constitution, and have even claimed that it is just a piece of paper, there is always a voice of dissent that is seemingly heard. It's once these avenues or voices of dissent are suppressed or eliminated that cause for action is warranted.

We can't undo any actions, and turmoil in which resulted, due to the lack of participation or awareness of the doings that come from the American Government. What can be done, is acknowledge a fact, that it is a government of and by the people. We keep voting in career politicians, who are in bed with big money and corporations, and then we sit here an wonder why things are the way they are? THAT'S THE BIGGEST JOKE IN THE WORLD.

Just because politicians and lobbyist were able to play on your emotions, take advantage of particular events and situations, doesn't at all exclude any one of us from responsibility of what resulted. This is the one point that I wish every American could understand and live by. ACCEPT THE RESPONSIBILITY, or maybe the nanny and welfare state has treated you all too kindly.

If I need help, I will turn to my family. If they won't help, I will turn to my friends. If both of those options are not available, I'm either doing something wrong or a victim of circumstance. Next I will turn to my local church, not because I'm religious, but rather, because I support many of the ideologies and philosophies presented in the text. As well, it will strengthen my community and introduce me to people who do want the best for others(in most cases). What I will not do, is accept/expect or ask for any assistance in the form of Monetary needs from the American Government, BECAUSE THAT IS NOT WHY THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT IS THERE FOR IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Rant over, adopt my ideology and prosper.

Lyric of the Day:
"Blow / Funk Flex Freestyle"

Pusha T
No weapon formed against me shall prosper
Hakuna matata, feet up, sipping java

Kanye West:
And eventually answers to the call of Autumn
All of them fallin' for the love of ballin'



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


Do you think Newt truly believes and is committed to his platform? Do you think he has the integrity and guts to buck up against his own party when his platform is neutered and morphed to fit the Republican Establishment agenda instead of the common man who supported and elected him?

In my opinion, there is no evidence of integrity, guts, or commitment in Newt, and that is precisely why I don't trust him enough to vote for him. In fact, there is a lot of evidence that he lacks commitment and integrity.
edit on 26-1-2012 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)


Newt's platform is cash and lot's of it that and Israel. He's been sucking up to Israel for quite a while now.




posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


I gave you many stars for at least trying to have a thread that isn't overwhelmed by Paulites. It is a simple enough question that unfortanatly atracted the Trolls.
Ron Paul fans are the worst thing about his campain they do more harm than good. I was on the fence but they insisted on pushing me to the other side with there badgering


I would Vote Newt over Mitt. There are just to many things I do not like about Mitt he trys to act like one of the middle class and has even said it but the man makes 76,000 dollars a day and only pays 13.9% in tax on it to top that off he earns that just in interest. He doesn't even have to work for it. Newt has personal baggage but I just do not care. Some of our better Presidents screwed around JFK anyone. Newt isn't perfect but I like him better than Mitt.

If Mitt wins and it is him VS Obama. I can't say at this point but I will not write in anyone that would be just like not voting at all.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Observation:
Romney debate mannerisms: stare, listen and blink.

We need more involvement and action from our candidates.
Digging up thirty year old dirt on Newt and trying to make it stick is shameful and lame.

We ain't picking a spouse here, we are trying to pick a President, and love him or hate him, Newt is obviously the most qualified person to run in modern times.

This country is in a desperate situation so we can't expect to get the perfect, choir singing candidate.
It ain't gonna be pretty because desperate times call for desperate measures.
Again, there is no such thing as the perfect candidate.

I'm choosing Newt over Obomney because I will not order from the MSM menu.
Surely he will tear up Obama in the debates, and that is why the MSM fear him and keep trying to bring him down.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


I gave you many stars for at least trying to have a thread that isn't overwhelmed by Paulites. It is a simple enough question that unfortanatly atracted the Trolls.
Ron Paul fans are the worst thing about his campain they do more harm than good. I was on the fence but they insisted on pushing me to the other side with there badgering


I would Vote Newt over Mitt. There are just to many things I do not like about Mitt he trys to act like one of the middle class and has even said it but the man makes 76,000 dollars a day and only pays 13.9% in tax on it to top that off he earns that just in interest. He doesn't even have to work for it. Newt has personal baggage but I just do not care. Some of our better Presidents screwed around JFK anyone. Newt isn't perfect but I like him better than Mitt.

If Mitt wins and it is him VS Obama. I can't say at this point but I will not write in anyone that would be just like not voting at all.


Trolling? I didn't see too much of that, but I dont care to argue the semantics in defining the very notion that the Paulites have trolled this thread.

Next, to make the claim that writing someone in is just like not voting at all is one of the foremost largest hurdles for the American people to get over. Realize that upon founding and establishing the American Government, Partisan politics was not by any means a part of the program. In fact, many of the founding fathers spoke out against it, knowing that what we have today(partisan) politics would emerge and create moments of stagnation as well as allow for mob rule.

I highly suggest researching what effects a vote will have if it is for a candidate that is not on the ballot. It is not a waste, and actually supports or strengthens those that the vote was cast for. It's not an all or nothing type of situation in which you are seemingly implying. Things take time, generations if you will, if you want a final solution... well history will tell you how final solutions work out.

If you want to get all conspiratorial about it, any group could effectively place members in the driver seat for each party... the tactics in which it would take to accomplish this are complex at first glance, but with a simple understanding of politics, philosophy and sociology, this can be accomplished with in any one life time. Well, now according to your suggestion(of not writing in) there is absolutely no option, and dissent has been officially eliminated. Well, that's not a world I choose to live in, and fortunately enough, there are enough people like myself that spend time educating, or at least planting the seed of how to balance our responsibility to be involved in politics, with the responsibility that we have with our communities, families, and ourselves.

You can hate on Ron Paul all you want, and Florida will definitely be your cup of tea. Don't expect those numbers to follow suite. I'd hate to say this, but Florida, as a whole... doesn't mean jack, and has very limited influence in the overall economy of the nation. If you were to eliminate tourism, and old folks, they'd be as influential as Wyoming. Tourism and Demographics change... Manufacturing, Big Business, and Resources are more sustainable. Just look at Las Vegas(although that's a different beast).

On a side note... A good friend of mind just started attending college again, after a 4 year absence. He brought home with him a new text book, copy write of 2011. I was simply amazed at the vastness in information that could be found in this book, accurate as well(to the best of my knowledge). This was truly a sight for sore eyes after reading through his books from 4 years ago, that were so bias, that it made Bill O'Reily look fair and balanced.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


I wouldjust write in ron paul.

Id rather give him my vote than help newt or mitt? And thats because the republicans do way more damage to our country than the democrats. Dont get me wrong, the democrats suck too. But newt and mitt are worse



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 06:10 PM
link   
i would vote neither!!!!
both are shills big time!!!!
they will bow to corporate masters like the rest!!!

instead i will vote for the skeletal remains of "bubbles"

micheal jacksons dead chimp RIP



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   
Newt or Mitt? So both of them are wrong. That's polite word, they are blood sucking vampires so why would one even consider voting for any of this 2 corrupted, possibly non-human beings?

I'm personally sorry for those types of people that don't see how Newt and Mitt are enemy of every human being on world. I tell you people, it is enough to hear someone speak for few minutes, and you can see if he is bad person.

Newt and Mitt are bad, they want to suck your blood, and your children's blood, like Obama suck it now, like Bush and Clinton sucked before them.

Now only difference here is Ron Paul.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by mishigas
 



Obama's record of incompetence and corruption should be the focus of the debate.


I work for the government, and I talk to the public, and I hear people worship Obama everyday. I've heard people give him credit for everything from their street getting paved to their mail arriving on time.
Seriously, every day, people credit Obama with a ton of stuff! His record of incompetence is not so blatant as we would assume.


Any thinking person knows that statements like "He will show 100 jobs lost for every one Bain created" are pure unadulterated bs and easily debunked.


Doesn't matter if it is debunked with facts, in the talking . aftermath of a debate. The general public only listens to the things that interrupt their regular shows, and the 10 second blurbs, .lines, and soundbites that get replayed over and over again. The facts don't matter, the unemployment rate, and blaming a rich guy is all that matters. Obama and the Dems will destroy Mitt on his own personal wealth, and the carnivorous nature of Bain Capital. It won't matter that he actually did some good, and streamlined the businesses, and created better business models. All of that will be lost in the mundane details. All that will matter is Obama smiling, looking smug, and declaring it as a fact.


Paul is a joke with a very limited demographic of supporters. His base has not grown over the years; it is the same group with additions from idealistic new college kids. He is still only pulling single digits in any meaningful metric. He has no chance whatsoever of becoming the nominee or the potus.


Since this is a thread specifically NOT about Paul, I'll let that slide, but suffice to say it is absolutely 100% wrong, and even a minutes worth of research will show you Paul is tied with Romney on the results when they are faced off against Obama. He may not have any chance at being the nominee, but he has the best shot at being the president (if he had the GOP backing, not as an Independent).


Plus, his foreign policy is the laughingstock of the nation and the globe.

Only the very uninformed would say anything like this. His foreign policy is the only one that makes any sense. He wants to open up more trade, break into new markets, use diplomacy instead of military, focus our dollars, and our aid, and our efforts at home to build up our nation instead of building an empire abroad. Some people mistakenly call it "isolationism," but that is the farthest from the truth. The truth is, our current foreign policy has isolated us, and also isolated many emerging markets out of our reach. Paul could and would improve our global reputation, tap into new markets, and help our economy to recover at home!! Don't take my word for it necessarily, just go listen to Paul's words. He does not stand for isolationism.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   
not gonna vote



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by MESSAGEFROMTHESTARS
 


Troll much?
Open your own thread. I actualy want to know what people think going by the OPs post.

Seven pages and here are the totals so far.

9- for Newt
6- for Mitt



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


reply to post by mishigas


Obama's record of incompetence and corruption should be the focus of the debate.




I work for the government, and I talk to the public, and I hear people worship Obama everyday. I've heard people give him credit for everything from their street getting paved to their mail arriving on time. Seriously, every day, people credit Obama with a ton of stuff! His record of incompetence is not so blatant as we would assume.


Small samples of satisfied people can be found under any administration. We don't even know if those happy campers vote. Perhaps they were trying to curry favor with you in hopes of getting a better result with you. Iow, means nothing.

Any thinking person knows that statements like "He will show 100 jobs lost for every one Bain created" are pure unadulterated bs and easily debunked.




Doesn't matter if it is debunked with facts, in the talking . aftermath of a debate. The general public only listens to the things that interrupt their regular shows, and the 10 second blurbs, .lines, and soundbites that get replayed over and over again. The facts don't matter, the unemployment rate, and blaming a rich guy is all that matters. Obama and the Dems will destroy Mitt on his own personal wealth, and the carnivorous nature of Bain Capital. It won't matter that he actually did some good, and streamlined the businesses, and created better business models. All of that will be lost in the mundane details. All that will matter is Obama smiling, looking smug, and declaring it as a fact.


Once again, it will not change the mind of one undecided voter. We've all heard Obama's class warfare and his blaming everything from kiosks to tsunamis for the state of the union. We've heard it too many times by now.

One could spend an hour just listing he lies and broken promises Obama has made, starting with 'transparency' and followed by 'shovel ready jobs'. He has driven the unemployment rate sky high. He is incompetent.


Plus, his foreign policy is the laughingstock of the nation and the globe.


Only the very uninformed would say anything like this. His foreign policy is the only one that makes any sense. He wants to open up more trade, break into new markets, use diplomacy instead of military, focus our dollars, and our aid, and our efforts at home to build up our nation instead of building an empire abroad. Some people mistakenly call it "isolationism," but that is the farthest from the truth. The truth is, our current foreign policy has isolated us, and also isolated many emerging markets out of our reach. Paul could and would improve our global reputation, tap into new markets, and help our economy to recover at home!! Don't take my word for it necessarily, just go listen to Paul's words. He does not stand for isolationism.


My God, did you hear him in a recent debate where he objected to the Seals killing bin Laden? He actually worried that bin Laden might have been unarmed! It is examples like this that show his - what is it - senility? Wrong word, probably, but he is out of touch with reality in many cases. Here are a couple of short videos and an article which illustrate my point:

www.theblaze.com...



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by mishigas
 



My God, did you hear him in a recent debate where he objected to the Seals killing bin Laden? He actually worried that bin Laden might have been unarmed! It is examples like this that show his - what is it - senility?


If there really is a terrorist threat to the US, and if Seals really did storm his compound and corner him in a room, why kill him? Surely he is a treasure trove of information. Why kill him?

Paul is pointing out the absurdity of the whole thing. The government cries wolf over and over again, and demands more money, and more authority to protect us, and then they have the #1 treasure trove of information, and they just discard it?

Paul is trying to go mainstream, so he can't say it, but there is no logic. Either we never killed him, or he was already dead. We didn't get that close, corner and capture him, and then throw away all that intel and dump the body at sea. If we DID do that, then we are the most incompetent government in history.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Gary Johnson.
Lizard People, maybe?



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


mitt is smarter, yes. that's it.
I dont think either are right. but out of the two, mitt. I am tired of embarrassing presidents who can't even read a teleprompter. I am still traumatized by bush. uuugh. dark age of American politics


the good old boys need to retire already and listen to the beach boys into oblivion. No more golden boys!

oh boy
edit on 26-1-2012 by casenately because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   
I VOTED FOR NAAADEEERRRR!!!!!

I would vote for Gingrich, better chance he will crash and fail and the American people will have another chance to wake up. I would rather have a president who cant read the teleprompter and we can laugh at than a skilled actor who can screw us twice as fast with half the worry.
edit on 26-1-2012 by tehdouglas because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
6
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join