Why We Need to Vote Romney! We Need Obama Out!!

Obama will remain. And it won't be because he was elected. All the props you vote for will be overturned by a judge if they do not aspire to the agenda.

Why We Need to Vote Romney! We Need Obama Out!!,

I agree that we need Obama out. But I don't agree that we need Romney in.
Unfortunately, that's the choice ... Obama or Romney.
Given the two .. I'd take Romney. (But I voted absentee for Gary Johnson ... )

There is no choice. Only the illusion of choice.

Think TWICE before you do something you would regret later on. Romney will mean death since he will (likely) start WW III with Iran. You know this!

Originally posted by ErEhWoN
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

He knows how to make money. LOTS of Money. He's damn good in an executive position, making money for the entity he''s running.

Wrong reason to vote for him.

He's good at running a COMPANY.

The United States of America is not incorporated. Flag don't say USA Inc. It's a country of PEOPLE, not a corporation.

Yup.. He's good at running a company. That tells me he understands economics at a working level and down where the things really happen across America. He won't need endless committee meetings and 10 czars to tell him the basic things needed (whatever eventually looks best) to get things moving. I really want a President for a change here who actually DOES have real world and long term experience at being a success. We've had plenty or far too many recently, who know nothing but how to delegate authority to questionable people appointed by them. Red and Blue both represented quite well on that one.

Also, as a Capitalist nation....IF we ever get to see capitalism again (It's been a LONG time since I've seen it around here in any real form) America IS very much like a vast Corporation. When America also sets and defines the world markets and reserve currency, however much longer that lasts. I'd say it'd BETTER look at itself as a corporation with profitable operation being important. Without that, indeed... America DOES fail and fall fairly quick......

Other nations like China absolutely ARE looking at THEMSELVES that way and it's called pursuing their national interest's. Romney seems interested in doing that. Great! The last two haven't been.

reply to post by Jeremiah65

i did not infer or state that RP was a registered Libertarian, why are you ?
i simply said ...

Ron Paul hasn't officially endorsed any nominee ?? not even Johnson and they are representing the same party (Libertarians).

unless you are implying/suggesting that he isn't representing anyone except Republicans, i don't follow your point.

i'd agree the grammar wasn't at its best form but i never said Paul is a Libertarian.

I have fiscal conservative views (as Libertarians do) but that doesn't make me a Republican now does it? I have socially liberal views....and that doesn't make me a Democrat either does it

don't know and don't care ... you can party with whomever you please, it's really none of my business.

fair enough, i have qualms with Paul myself.
i like him alot but i don't believe (in my heart) that he would survive the term.
i could nit-pick but what's the point ??

Johnson has good points and some i find not so good.
but alas, that's all part of the game.
at the end of the day, the party holds no weight in my decision.

(psssst, i'm old enough to remember Paul being the Libertarian nominee in 88 so, it's not like i asked an absurd question)
thanks for affirming the grammar error, it startled me

ok, clearly our hangup is in the interpretation of the word "representing" and for that i apologize.
just to clarify ... each nominee is representing ALL of us, all the parties and all the ppl in them.
hopefully on that note, we agree.

reply to post by Honor93


Oh I remember 88 as well. Back in those days...I forget what year, he did an interview and basically predicted this maddening state of affairs we are currently in. I saw the video a while back and it was one of those "oh wow, the man knew what he was talking about" moments.

I completely have no issue with non-affiliated people. I chose to grab onto the Libertarian party because I agree with their platform and the philosophy of freedom and self reliance. I can find nothing in the platform I disagree with and I do agree that smaller gov and more freedom is the way back to the road of prosperity.

Thanks for the conversation btw. And I do agree, they are supposed to represent the best interests of all of us. Some of us have different opinions of what that is though.

That tells me he understands economics at a working level and down where the things really happen across America.

A successful business' priority is not to "create jobs".
A successful business ABOVE ALL is concerned about profit.

They will hire people THEN if the hiring of people means it will help increasing profits. People are not getting hired because a company is under an obligation to hire - a company is not a welfare organization hiring people out of pity!

"Understanding economics" does NOT automatically mean that those who look for work would all of a sudden all get jobs..understanding economics means to know how and where to invest, and also how and where to cut expenses. (Which also includes lay-offs as means to keep a company up, if so required).

A smart business might lay off their workers if there is no orders, or would outsource if production becomes too expensive.

Now..tell me where Romney's "expertise" in economics comes in to "all of a sudden" create millions of new jobs? Could you let me know please? Because....OF COURSE he will tell the people what they fricking want to hear..the people who think that rich and successful people are mainly "creating jobs"...and that voting for a Rep will automatically boost the economy.

What are his plans?

Will he contact all the big corporates and tell them that from now on, it will be forbidden to outsource all the CSR jobs, support etc. to India or Pakistan? Will he make a new law telling them they have to let all their foreign and cheap workers go...and instead (forced by a new law) are required to hire people in the US first? Will he give companies tax breaks for hiring people? Will he pay unemployed people to get education and training which would increase their chances on the job market? What, EXACTLY, will he do? (And empty words don't count, i want specific plans!)

Of course, he won't do ANY of the above because you guys would deem anything like the above as communism/socialism..any kind of intervention (eg. tax breaks for hiring companies)...or financial support for unemployed for training etc..it will NEVER happen in YOUR country.

Giving the 1% more money will NOT heal this economy if there is still a huge number of poor people. Many poor people = weak economy. Why would the companies hire more employees if 60% or more of the populace have no money to buy things? If no one has money, there is no demand. People strive to survive, to pay their bills, they don't have extra money as they do in a good economy with many people having well paid jobs.

You can give all the "rich" corporate bosses tax cuts and more money and live the illusion it will boost the economy, but it won't. It will only benefit the few "rich ones" to keep in business a little longer (maybe) and it might delay the one or other lay-off.....

reply to post by Jeremiah65

yes opinions do differ don't they ??

unfortunately, for me, the Libertarian platform isn't complete and at the same time it's a bit unrealistic.
live and let live is a great concept but it only works when everyone participates.
unfortunately, that isn't the world in which we live.

for me, it leaves far too much room for the corruption we endure daily to continue and expand.
but, that's my humble opinion, yours probably differs

personal disclosure -- i have never been convinced that my vote does much, however, i am sure that not voting enables the BS to continue.

so, in appreciation of the "statistical community" and their popular twist on everything, i've come to rather enjoy being the statistical anomaly.

i am one of the voters who seldom vote "party lines".
and, i will specifically register for the party i am least likely to vote for, hence the anomaly

thank you for the continued conversation
i may still write-in RP, GJ or VG, haven't really decided just yet.
however, i will NOT vote Obama or Romney.

Originally posted by flexy123

That tells me he understands economics at a working level and down where the things really happen across America.

A successful business' priority is not to "create jobs".
A successful business ABOVE ALL is concerned about profit.

In the general example of corporate America, you're right. Strictly speaking, creating jobs isn't the point and it's generally a side benefit of expansion which IS usually the point, as that leads to increased everything including profit.

However, in the case of Bain Capital, ummm.. creating jobs was precisely what they did for a living and it was their purpose in life. Seeing companies improve and succeed is what made them money and by extension, what Romney became rather talented at by all reports. They recovered many and MANY companies and some of the largest names in retail and services have benefited from them....to the notion they somehow benefited by ruining anyone. lol..

Now..tell me where Romney's "expertise" in economics comes in to "all of a sudden" create millions of new jobs? Could you let me know please? Because....OF COURSE he will tell the people what they fricking want to hear..the people who think that rich and successful people are mainly "creating jobs"...and that voting for a Rep will automatically boost the economy.

Well, first..you'll have to show me the last Presidential Candidate who had a strong and expert background in economics specifically. Obama the Community Organizer and business lawyer who wrote himself how much he hated it.... Bush the professional politician and all around Texas version of a trust fund baby.... Clinton did fairly well despite the lack of good background..and going back? A Comedian, A Peanut farmer and a Texas cattleman.

We're disqualifying candidates now because they aren't economic gurus from day 1? Mitt's a millionaire through self development, hard work and what he made. That says a lot. Obama is a millionaire from writing of 'dreams' he had of his Father. Many see no difference. I see a HUGE one.

What are his plans?

Check his website. You'll find he and Ryan both came up with quite a bit recently. Theres only so far I go in supporting I guy I can BARELY stand to vote for in truth. I just feel the other guy is absolute certain doom...so you'll have to read those plans. They're there tho and interesting at least.

Will he contact all the big corporates and tell them that from now on, it will be forbidden to outsource all the CSR jobs, support etc. to India or Pakistan?

I'd rather have Customer Service Rep jobs outsourced to timbuktu than have Automaking jobs outsourced everywhere BUT here. Government Motors (A reason to throw this bum out all by itself) has closed TEN...TEN...factories in the United States since 2009. They brag about their new acquisitions and opening facilities in China and across Asia.

Pot meet Kettle on outsourcing. Obama just does it under the guise of Government Policy.

Will he make a new law telling them they have to let all their foreign and cheap workers go...and instead (forced by a new law) are required to hire people in the US first? Will he give companies tax breaks for hiring people? Will he pay unemployed people to get education and training which would increase their chances on the job market? What, EXACTLY, will he do? (And empty words don't count, i want specific plans!)

We all want things.. You want specific plans from a man who has yet to serve. I'm still waiting for those specifics from a man who has served nearly 4 years now. I absolutely deserve mine first....but have accepted I'll never get it if it hasn't been forthcoming by now.

After all, Obama hasn't even passed a friggen Budget since 2009 and that's not just a good idea to do, it's an outright stated legal requirement of the Constitution. Perhaps Congress is the bottleneck, but the Presidents of the past have broken that bottleneck with things like forced special sessions........This President just says they don't like him and won't play nice.

Your votes don't count because 'they' count the votes.It's all been decided already.Good luck if you think voting makes any difference.P.S -'they already decided to give Obama a second term.Sorry to rain on your parade.

It's 2012.

2012.

Look back. You think this, such an event, isn't set in stone at the very least, 2-4 years ahead?!

Why, in all aspects of government based social and political aspects, would they ever allow people to have choice, when it is all to easy to give the *illusion of choice*!? Why give the masses free will when they can fake it and call it choice?

We say this. They say that. Pick a side.

I was asked the other day by a coworker who I was going to vote for. I flipped a quarter to him, he caught it. He looked at me a little confused and I simply said "There, a quarter. Two sides. Same quarter."

That's my take on it anyway. We don't have a say. We have a choice, but at the end of the day, heads or tails, same damn thing. The only valid thing we can do is acknowledge that and attempt to change our mindset, aside from that, you don't have a choice but to play into their hands, republican, democrat or 3rd party.

reply to post by 1frenchfryshort

Your votes don't count because 'they' count the votes.It's all been decided already.Good luck if you think voting makes any difference.P.S -'they already decided to give Obama a second term.Sorry to rain on your parade

Man I remember when I real rebel and only I thought this way.

"The close relationship between politics and economics is neither neutral nor coincidental. Large governments evolve through history in order to protect large accumulations of property and wealth." -Michael Parenti- This quote is very telling on how large scale governing entities operate. There is no vast mystery, no grand education required, and no special foresight needed to understand this concept. It is the way every empire evolved and later fell, to one extent or another. From the Egyptian Empire, to the Roman Empire, to the British Empire, and currently the American Empire. It is seemingly a natural cycle of imperial power and control.To understand wealth domination of the political forum in America you need to look no further than the two candidates (if you prefer to call them that) that are currently running for President. Mitt Romney (R)Goldman Sachs: $891,140 Bank of America: $668,139JPMorgan Chase & Co: $663,219 Morgan Stanley: $649,847SourceBarack Obama (D)University of California: $706,931Microsoft Corp: $544,445 Google Inc: $526,009Harvard University: $433,860SourceNow keep in mind I only listed the top four contributors for each candidate. There is much more money being thrown around in this particular political atmosphere. To think any candidate has any interest in mind other than their largest monetary supporters is naive at best. A democratic style government at it's core should have a sense of balance in regards to its policies. The American version has very little balance, even on its best day.

Originally posted by Athin
First off I've repeated this several times. I am NOT a republican. I belong to the CSP. Common Sense Party. So before the bashing starts just realize that I'm not voting for Romney because of Romney.

Now for the most important part... to anyone voting for a 3rd party candidate. DON'T! I understand where you stand completely. You share more views and values with these men. They represent, more than the others, what you want out of a politician. The thing is... we need your vote. You want to make a stand and vote for neither of the two main candidates and you KNOW that your vote will be wasted for one simple reason. There is no way he is going to win. It WILL BE Romney or Obama. You may think some miracle is going to happen and the U.S. is finally awake but they're not. A lot more than usual are... but not enough. Maybe some time in the future it won't be a 2 party system but this election is.

Now... the reason we need Romney in the white house. Simple answer. We need Obama out. Look at what he has done already. Let's think about this...

When Obama took office gas was 1.75 Now it's 3.71
People on welfare went from 31.9 million to 46.4 million
Oil Drilling permits under Clinton rose 58%. Under Bush up 116%. Under Obama DOWN 36%
Americas credit rating downgraded for the FIRST TIME IN HISTORY. Lets not forget about that.
Losing half a million dollars on Solyndra. Losing how much else on failing 'green energy' companies?
We get about HALF of our energy from coal. Not only are we closing plants down but Obama has said that if someone wants to open a new one they will "probably go bankrupt" because of his policies.

This is just scratching the surface and bringing up random things that may not be big in some peoples eyes. Well... what about the larger things?....

LYING to the citizens about what happened with the embassy in Lybia. Trying to cover it up. Trying to place blame not on his subpar foreign relation policies but on a video that had less than 500 views at the time of the attack. This is huge! Do some research on this one because it's way to big to cover here.

Bypassing congress! This is NOT a dictatorship! What does Obama do when he doesn't get what he wants?(regardless of having democratic control of both house and senate for his first 2 years) The Dream act is one thing. He wants the hispanic vote... so reform immigration even though it failed. But to bypass congress and fund the Palestinian Authority? Hama has rejoined the PA... so we just gave almost 200 million TO A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION!

The Fast and Furious debacle! American citizens wants to know what happened. Why we had an American murdered with a gun supplied by the administration. To use executive power to block everything so we can't see what really happened? What's the matter Mr. President... did you have a hand in that? Is that why you're protecting Holder? Holder... the same guy you appointed who REFUSED to prosecute a Black Panther who was VIDEOTAPED trying to intimidate white voters at the polls.

Please think people... this is historic. This is BIG. This WILL CHANGE AMERICA as we know it if Obama is re-elected. Think what he will do when he KNOWS he can't be elected again. These are scary times... and I know Romney isn't the perfect choice... I know "they're both puppets"... but I would rather vote for a new puppet and pray for a new direction than vote for the same puppet and know exactly where we're going.

 

edit on Wed, 10 Oct 2012 22:39:36 -0500 by JacKatMtn because: Mod Edit: All Caps Title – Please Review This Link.

As bad as Obama's economic policies are, Romney will make it much worse. And throw in a few new wars too. If Romney wins it is curtains for the western world. If Obama wins it's still curtains, but will just take longer. I'll take the can kicker any day.

Never trust a man that talks out the side of his mouth, or that smirks and nods at the end of every sentence, no but being honest, I can't see why people are not seeing all of the mistakes and inconsistency of Mitt Romney in this campaign and only finally seeming to get it right during a debate, this will transfer into his presidency trust me and at the wrong time it will be disaster for us all especially when it comes to his beliefs on foreign policy.

I said seeming to get it right, because he never took responsibility for any of his policies, and used objections every time the president used facts and presented Romneys own policies before him to defend, he just said , that's not my plan then made up a scripted lie to tell to the millions of those dumb enough that has never really heard Romney's base ideologies, many times during the debate I myself thought Romney might be an undercover democrat to be honest, his love and warmth for the middle class and the 47% really shining through in an unconvincing way except those that were really hearing Romney for the first time, he sold you something that had never been shared previously, sounded really good though didn't it ? enough to make you really believe the lies.

I say to those with blinders that really thinks that Mitt Romney has you on his agenda think again, I seriously doubt that he has any of us on his list of favorites, let me put it bluntly, if you are not in the millionaires club, you probably have absolutley no business voting for Mitt Romney, you think things are bad now? if he gets into the White House he has already told you some things that will increase the pain here at home and work against even his own grand plans of bring the economy back.

The stock market was at less then 8000 when Obama took office, now it is over 13,000, when he took over the treasury secretary and many leading economists said we were on the verge of a great depression, has it happened yet? I do not see any sort of grapes of wrath scenario.

I see people buying iphones and other gadgets costing 600-1000 dollars like it is nothing, I see many people driving around in brand new vehicles worth at least 30,000 dollars, new homebuilding all over, home depot full every time I go there, malls full, I mean I could go on and on with the visible things many people are in denial about their being better off from 4 years ago, but Obama may not have been perfect, but he definitely was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth like Mitt Romney, for Romney to say he can be empathetic to the middle class or poor and actually identifiy with that situation is laughable.

He looks and sounds like he is the one or some relic that looks like the dad in leave it to beaver who in the back of his mind thinks he is Ronald Reagan, but he is nothing but a fake politician just as was Reagan posing and saying what you want to hear and a lot of people fell for it, like most in that profession that want a vote when they know they are going to lose.

reply to post by Athin

reply to post by Athin


Im sorry man, but a vote for either of them is a vote to continue this fascist bribery state. Anyone who votes for either of the two because they think voting for the person they actually want is a waste should be a crime. Understand, that if everyone voted for Ron Paul who said in the past that they would have but didnt because 'he just cant win', Ron Paul would be president.

I can't stand this mentality. It is what has destroyed this country.

Get with it. Understand it. And do NOT go around trying to convince people to not vote for who they feel, in their heart and mind, is their candidate. It is unamerican and destructive.

Originally posted by AllInMyHead
Sorry, and I say this as respectfully as I can, but I think your wacked. I am no huge fan of either Obama or Romney but there is NO way NO how that I can see how a reasonable person could vote for Romney. He lies...CONSTANTLY, changes positions at the drop of a hat and doesn't seem to have a position on ANYTHING other than trying to be the opposite of Obama...which really isn't working all that well for him. So sorry, and I know that there are gonna be dozens but disagree with me, but I am gonna stick with Barack this time around.

And your point is?

But seriously, I agree with you completely. And it is very telling how these Obama bashers go on and on about how bad he is, yet they have nothing good -- nay, nothing whatsoever -- to say about Romney. It reminds me of how cats deal with opossums -- they totally ignore them, even if the opossum is eating out of the cat's bowl.

I have a lot of problems with Obama -- like how he subverts and circumvents the constitution and coddles white-collar criminals and war criminals -- but how can anyone think that spineless/chameleon Romney, a member of the stinking rich class to boot, will be any better. Sure, Obama lies some, but Romney lies about everything, and changes his position day in and day out, and then his operatives walk things back immediately afterwards. Romney is a high-class street hustler/confidence man -- more sickeningly so than any other politician I have ever seen. I could not stand Bush II, and felt he was incompetent as all get out and in the pocket of business interests, but he didn't lie and say whatever would appeal to his current audience. Romney, on the other hand, has taken flip-flopper to a new level; in fact, he makes the term flip-flopper respectable in comparison to himself.

But all these Obama haters can do is rail on Obama; they have nothing good to say about Romney. It makes one wonder...

Originally posted by Athin

Now... the reason we need Romney in the white house. Simple answer. We need Obama out. Look at what he has done already. Let's think about this...

When Obama took office gas was 1.75 Now it's 3.71

Gas was tied to the commodities market in 2001 under Bush/Cheney. That means that Wall St sets the gas prices. The US economy doesn't, and never will again.

Failed point #1

People on welfare went from 31.9 million to 46.4 million

The Wall St. collapse caused every community level bank (where small business gets its credit lifeline) to become squeezed by the big banks - who are now sitting on trillions of this very critical investment capital (stored in off-shore accounts, and likely over 3 trillion by now) and denying it to those community commercial banks. This is what is stalling the recovery. That, and the GOP's refusal to even vote on the Obama Jobs Bill that would put a half million construction workers back to work fixing our crumbling infrastructure (which would boost literally every local economy in the country).

Failed point #2

Oil Drilling permits under Clinton rose 58%. Under Bush up 116%. Under Obama DOWN 36%

We've actually run low on available federal lands for oil drilling. It happens after decades of granting leases. The truth is a majority of the present leases on federal lands have yet to be drilled at all. If the companies want to drill, then they have untapped leases to drill, but they don't.

Failed point #3

Americas credit rating downgraded for the FIRST TIME IN HISTORY.

Standard & Poors specifically blamed the bizarre Tea Party wing of the Congress and its stranglehold on the House leadership for the downgrade.

Failed point #4

Lets not forget about that.
Losing half a million dollars on Solyndra. Losing how much else on failing 'green energy' companies?

5% of the 10 billion for green technology went to start-ups that failed. Just 5%. That's an excellent percentage when you consider that 80% of start-ups fail as a normal average.

Failed point #5

We get about HALF of our energy from coal. Not only are we closing plants down but Obama has said that if someone wants to open a new one they will "probably go bankrupt" because of his policies.

I'll need a source for this. Sounds like one of those WND fabrications.

LYING to the citizens about what happened with the embassy in Lybia. Trying to cover it up. Trying to place blame not on his subpar foreign relation policies but on a video that had less than 500 views at the time of the attack. This is huge! Do some research on this one because it's way to big to cover here.

The facts aren't even established on that Libya attacks yet, and Reagan had a much worse incident/deaths record concerning attacks - check the Congressional record for the list as read by a Tennessee rep at the hearing yesterday.

Failed point #6

Bypassing congress! This is NOT a dictatorship! What does Obama do when he doesn't get what he wants? The Dream act is one thing. He wants the hispanic vote... so reform immigration even though it failed.

He temporarily shut down enforcement activities involving a very limited sub-group's arrest and deportation until the legislation could at least be voted on. Illinois governor did the same thing with the death penalty until problems could be fixed with prosecutions. Enforcement is controlled by the Executive Branch.

Failed point #7

But to bypass congress and fund the Palestinian Authority? Hama has rejoined the PA... so we just gave almost 200 million TO A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION!

I went three pages into Google and never found any such report. Source please.

The Fast and Furious debacle! American citizens wants to know what happened. ... Holder... the same guy you appointed who REFUSED to prosecute a Black Panther who was VIDEOTAPED trying to intimidate white voters at the polls.

Fast and Furious was an extension program of a Bush/Cheney gun-running scheme that was grandfathered in without Holder's direct involvement or even knowledge. When he discovered it, he shut it down and reported it to Congress. This has already been determined by an independent investigation that Holder requested.

The BLACK PANTHER foolishness was two black guys standing outside a polling place in their own housing projects neighborhood, who were giving some sh*t to a GOP party operative with a video camera who they'd never seen stalking around their neighborhood before. They had black jackets on, but they weren't Black Panthers. They were just local guys wonder what the hell that out of towner was doing with the camera, and they tried acting tough to run him off. Like George Zimmerman, only without shooting anyone.

Failed point #8

You suck at this sort of thing.