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.

 

Mitt OR Newt - who would make the better President?

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 04:57 AM
link   
Romney is a professional corporate raider...

Shipping jobs to China is and was his way to extract more money out of his
equity ventures, stop being retarded.




posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 05:09 AM
link   


We stand a chance even if we don't know, that things might get better if the GOP gets in.


Well, that's what people hoped when Obama was voted in. Will they get better? I would think people would be tired of the back and forth. Democrats suck? Vote republican. No, wait, republicans suck, so we better vote democrat. No, wait...democrats suck....etcetera, etcetera.

The foundation of the entire country is cracked. You can keep painting the trim and fixing broken windows but eventually, the house will collapse.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 05:36 AM
link   
[removed unnecessary quote of entire preceding post]


Obama was a mistake.

I'd like to think that his term in office was a wake-up call for the rest of the country.






edit on 1/31/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 05:57 AM
link   
These are establishment candidates, neither one of them would hold any power. They are attempting to buy the election so they can further erode America. Why the hell would SuperPacs spend millions and millions and million and millions on these guys, why would Goldman Sachs be giving them mountains of cash to run their campaigns. The financial crisis wasn't long ago and suddenly you have all forgotten. America needs to wake up. These guys can not take these companies/banks money and then rail against them and support the American People. IT is NOT possible, they are stealing it from us, wake up. I can't believe this*SNIP*

For christ sakes, look at the campaign sponsors and dig deep and see who is behind the SuperPacs, it's ridiculous that people believe everything the TV set tells them. These guys do not represent you, they are running to maintain the status quo and are being paid to do so. If you can't see it, you're blind, don't roll over and accept it. The time to fight and stand up for what you believe in is now. We can work together and take back the Whitehouse/Congress and make them accountable to their real Bosses, the American People. We must stop the madness and we must stop it now.

No more bankster run politician, no more former fed chairman as Secretary of Treasurer, no more big banking CEO on the administrations in any capacity. Smarten up, these guys are going to completely *SNIP* destroy us.

It's time to fight back. We need a revolution now before it's too late. We need to march right up to the Whitehouse lawn and we need to do it yesterday. We need make the representative government afraid of the people, not the people terrified of the government. We need real change, neither of these three puppets change anything.

I am begging you to not fall for this left/right paradigm crap. There is no 2 parties, they are in it together. Please for the love of god put an end to the sham.
edit on 31-1-2012 by macaronicaesar because: (no reason given)

edit on 1/31/2012 by semperfortis because: (no reason given)


Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.
edit on 1/31/2012 by semperfortis because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by jazzguy
why do people make these thread and leave out the obvious Ron Paul? we get enough of that in the media, why bring it to ATS?


This is by no means a definitive list of the Presidential candidates and I have not claimed it is either. I simply wish to know, from other ATS users, who - in their opinion - would make the better President from the two suggested.

Please do not feel obliged to contribute.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Interesting point.

Do you think he has served as a buffer between Republican Presidents? Do you think that absence has made the heart grow fonder - for a Rep POTUS?



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
I wouldn't want either one of those two, but of those two, I think Romney would be the most likely to put US interests ahead of his own interests....to have a conscience....to have some loyalty.

I don't think very highly of Newt.

To me that's almost like asking Would you rather die by drowning, or by being shot in the heart?



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by beezzer
 


Interesting point.

Do you think he has served as a buffer between Republican Presidents? Do you think that absence has made the heart grow fonder - for a Rep POTUS?
Nothing that deep.
Obama was a junior senator from Illinois. He was supposed to be "the saviour" and ended up being Cater v2.0.

It's an ideological difference that is greater than a dem or republican label.

It's the difference between pro-big government and anti-big government.

Nanny state vs Independence.

No responsibility vs personal responsibility.

I'm not sure if Newt or Mittens fit the total conservative package, but we know what Obama will bring to the table.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
Obama was a mistake.

I'd like to think that his term in office was a wake-up call for the rest of the country.


Right now IS a wake-up call. The alarm keeps going off and most of the people just keep hitting the snooze button. I don't see this upcoming election solving much of anything, except perhaps for eventually providing a more persistent alarm when the people all find themselves stark naked and facing the morning cold.

I see Newt as possibly being a President that can work well with Congress. That in itself is scary because he might be able to ram some really sleazy and dangerous legislation through very quickly and to our detriment. He has had some really whacky ideas and neither him nor Romney are promoting personal liberty.

Erosion of rights and liberties will continue and protesting factions will keep being beaten-down until the entire prison is rioting, and even then most people will probably not realize they are not the keepers but the inmates. We will consider ourselves fortunate and successful if we don't become like another Chinese factory assembly line.

Look deeply into Newt or Mitt's eyes and try to decide which one of them offers you the most comfort, the one you feel good with and who you feel can ease your pains. The world is developing around us and many of those people now are obtaining their middle-class comforts and conveniences for the first time. This goes on while Americans are finding they cannot sustain theirs. Your job is now to be happy with what you have and our leaders are there to reassure us, pat us on the head and tell us everything is going to be alright. So pick the one that offers you the most comfort.

For the few who will always pick up their shovel and do what needs to be done, who will look for opportunity and have kept a goal in mind and to look for something they can accomplish and achieve, there will always be means come along to attain their visions. They should avoid the traps of excessive debt and becoming mired in self-pity. It will matter little to them who the warden is because they will no longer just be serving time like most of those around them.

I don't believe either of these candidates are very charismatic leaders who can inspire the people to go beyond their present limitations. Neither have a dream of a more promising tomorrow. They offer the same pablum, their only promise for us is for smaller rations.


edit on 31-1-2012 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:20 AM
link   
If you flip a silver dollar in the air, does the the heads-or-tails result change the metal?

Lead the sheep to the slaughter house. If you put two doors in the front, will they think they had a choice?





*The same will be true when one of them goes up against Obama. It's like walking into an ice cream parlor that boasts 50 flavors, walking in and seeing it's all the same. "What's that one? It looks different?" "-That's Ron Paul"
edit on 31/1/12 by TreadUpon because: (no reason given)

edit on 31/1/12 by TreadUpon because: (no reason given)

edit on 31/1/12 by TreadUpon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by TreadUpon
 


Very philosophical!

Though I suppose the sheep have a choice of sorts (left or right). Not a good choice, but a choice nonetheless...



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by TreadUpon
If you flip a silver dollar in the air, does the the heads-or-tails result change the metal?

Lead the sheep to the slaughter house. If you put two doors in the front, will they think they had a choice?


Put two doors on front and they WILL think they had a choice. With those choices taken the end result is the same. Lead them up there on a glittered ramp so they will not consider the option of retreating, of going back through their struggle up that hill and back to their comfortable meadow where they once had it all, that is until they took the bright and flashing highway that promised the moon.


edit on 31-1-2012 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Erongaricuaro
. . . . . .
Look deeply into Newt or Mitt's eyes and try to decide which one of them offers you the most comfort, the one you feel good with and who you feel can ease your pains. The world is developing around us and many of those people now are obtaining their middle-class comforts and conveniences for the first time. This goes on while Americans are finding they cannot sustain theirs. Your job is now to be happy with what you have and our leaders are there to reassure us, pat us on the head and tell us everything is going to be alright. So pick the one that offers you the most comfort.

. . . . . .
I don't believe either of these candidates are very charismatic leaders who can inspire the people to go beyond their present limitations. Neither have a dream of a more promising tomorrow. They offer the same pablum, their only promise for us is for smaller rations.


edit on 31-1-2012 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)


I don't need, require, desire comfort from a president.

I want a mean SOB who will make the tough decisions and keep their damned filthy hands off the people, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights. If I want comfort, I'll ask the wife for a hug.

Not POTUS.

And I don't want charismatic. We got that with Obama. What did it get us? Loss of freedoms, more government intrusion.

Screw charismatic.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

I want a mean SOB who will make the tough decisions and keep their damned filthy hands off the people, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights. If I want comfort, I'll ask the wife for a hug.


Great then! You won't find much inspiration among this bunch. Whatever tough decisions they may make will likely not be for your benefit. If you want hands-off, sorry, your whole living routine will likely all be like going through TSA very soon.

Regardless of the choices offered, if you find your shovel has a comforting feel to it then it really matters much, much less who gets elected.


edit on 31-1-2012 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   
If I had to choose between the both of them, Romney then. Newt has a history for looking out for his own personal interests. He reminds me of a professional wrestler that has great mic skills but only does three moves. Mitt has a history of corporate head hunting so hopefully he translate it to cutting waste in gov spending. Both are progressives though and a choice for either more socialism or facism depending on who is in.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Mitt "Corporations are People" Romney as President will further the Corporatocracy of America. He'll sell us out to big money and with that ingratiating smile tell us useless eaters it's the solution to our problems. More decline,more suffering. You think the lobbyists running D.C. now is bad just let Mitt do his corporate raider thing.

Career politician Newt much like Obama will be totally ineffectual. All the back room deals he's made thorough the years will keep his hands tied and kowtowed to TPTB. Just another fat cat with a never ending line of bull#.

If the Republican Party nominates either one of these guys it will be due to quid pro quo and nothing to do with pulling America's ass out of the fire.

OP,I will respect your wishes and not name the one candidate who is the obvious choice.

Regards Peace in 2012.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by ComeFindMe
 


Hummm Eye of Newt or Toe of Frog...let's
see....think I will pass on this bubbling Caldron!



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by TreadUpon
 


Very philosophical!

Though I suppose the sheep have a choice of sorts (left or right). Not a good choice, but a choice nonetheless...

Yeah what more do they need they are just Sheep and want to be just Sheep.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
[removed unnecessary quote of entire preceding post]


Obama was a mistake.

I'd like to think that his term in office was a wake-up call for the rest of the country.



edit on 1/31/2012 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)


Obama has awoken a sleeping giant. - The Tea Party -


A shellacking 2.0 is on the way in November 2012.

Now everyone knows who George Soros is.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   
I wouldn't vote for either, they both are full of it. Ron Paul is the way to go....




top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join