Mitt is too reasonable for the far right.

1. 94

   habeeposted 12 years ago

   It doesn't look like my first pick in the GOP field, Huntsman, is going to get enough traction, so I've been reading more about Mitt. You guys prolly already know this, but I didn't know the details until now:
   
   - Mitt balanced his state's budget
   - he didn't accept a salary as gov. and paid for his personal and political travel out of his own pocket
   
   - He saved the Winter Olympics
   - donated $1 million to Olympics
   - donated his salary from Olympics to charity
   - Harvard Business School uses Mitt's actions as an example of how to turn around failing businesses
   - makes large donations to his church, Boy Scouts, cancer, epilepsy, AIDS, MS, cycstic fibrosis, Lou Gehrig's disease, homeless shelters, abused children, at-risk urban youth, schools, Katrina victims, earthquake and tsunami victims in Asia, wounded veterans, therapeutic horseback riding, girls' and boys' clubs, and more
   
   Mitt appeals more to moderates than any of the other GOP frontrunners do. If the GOP is smart, they'll forget about Newt. He turns off moderate conservatives like me! Do I like everything about Mitt? Nope! But I think he has the experience to help our floundering economy, and I also believe that he's a good person.

   replyreport
   1. 74

      Deni Edwardsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Mitt Romney, I believe, is the only candidate that could threaten the re-election of President Obama.  People just don't like Romney.  He can't relate, at all, to mainstream America.  I mean, the guy didn't even flinch when he stuck out his hand for a 10K bet.
      
      I wouldn't count Huntsman out just yet, however.  He's the only candidate (aside from Rick Santorum) that hasn't seen a spike in the polls.  He's not nutty, either, and I think that since so many people dislike Romney, republicans might start focusing in on Huntsman.
      
      Incidentally, my husband and I have a $5 bet about this.

      replyreport
      1. 62

         Lisa HWposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Completely separate from everything other than that bet issue, and separate from my own personal preferences...
         
         In fairness to this guy, there's the chance he doesn't ever bet, or else take the words, "I'll bet you," you very seriously.    He's been involved with those sports "bets" between governors and the sports team of a region/state (like sending chowder to New York's governor if the New England team loses - that type of thing); but that's a whole different kind of "betting". 
         
         People who don't even think in terms of REALLY betting are, I think, as likely to whip out the words, "ten thousand dollars" or "a million dollars" as they are "five dollars".  A lot of us have heard (or said) something along the lines of, "I'll bet you a million dollars blah blah blah..".
         
         I don't necessarily think the person's who out of touch with "betting lingo and terms" is out of touch with everything else in life.  I've had my times of being "as poor as they make 'em" , so I'm far from out of touch with "realities" - but betting has never been a part of life, or a part of my thinking; so I've been one of those people who'll whip off "I'll bet you a million dollars" from the top of my head, knowing that the other person doesn't take me seriously.
         
         I'm not a fan of some of the stuff he's been known to do, but at least he's not another Republican circus act being trotted out to make the next election a giant joke.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Paul Wingertposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Romney can't keep his BS stories straight.

            replyreport
            1. 94

               habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Few politicians can.

               replyreport
   2. 0

      Daniella Lopezposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I had no idea he didn't accept a salary whilst governor... This makes me like him a little more. xD

      replyreport
   3. 59

      Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      He "saved" the winter olympics?
      
      What is this? A Christmas Special? What, was he visited by the three ghosts of Olympic Glory? Did he fight off the Grinch of Laziness?
      
      Give me a break. The guy is a flip-flopping sell-out.

      replyreport
      1. 94

         habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Yes, he saved the 2002 Winter Olympics. You can find plenty about it on the internet, even on left-wing news outlets. Mitt was such an important aspect of the games that his picture even appeared on the Olympic pins.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            He was able to save it because he originally tried to kill it.
            
            Then he saved it, then he killed it, then he saved it, and then he killed it again, then, when a lobbyist paid him he saved Christmas... i mean, the olympics.
            
            I'm kidding, but the guy is still a sell out hack.

            replyreport
            1. 94

               habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Evan, I think Paul has some good ideas, but he also has some sorta crazy ideas. Do you think he's a racist/anti-Semite? I found these quotes by Ron Paul:
               
               "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."
               
               "Given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."
               
               "...by far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government."

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Those weren't written by Paul - they were in his newsletter. I agree that this is still bad, but then you have just about every one who has met him saying that he's not racist.
                  
                  To call him an anti-semite, you'd have to believe that "giving billions of dollars to Israel's enemies is pro-semitic".

                  replyreport
   4. 72

      Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      He's also too liberal (Romneycare) and too Mormon for the GOP to nominate him. He's more likely to get the nod than Paul, though. Romney won't cut defense, cut aid to Israel, or prosecute securities fraudsters. Paul will. (Well, maybe not prosecute fraudsters...Paul has interesting ideas about letting people sort out their own issues. Perhaps he'll let people who were illegally foreclosed on challenge the bank's CEO to a duel?)

      replyreport
      1. 94

         habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         

         replyreport
      2. 94

         habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         I understand the health care thing, but I don't understand the Mormon thing. One of my best friends was a Mormon, and she believed in Christ and was an awesome person. What's the big deal? Honestly, I'd vote for an atheist for POTUS if he/she were smart, compassionate, honest (for a politician), reasonable, held most of my views, and had the potential to turn our economy around.

         replyreport
         1. 72

            Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Well, see, Habee, you're a reasonable person, not a zealot. You're sane, not b@t$#!t crazy. You're a patriot, not a nationalist.
            
            You have to realize that many people really really care about whether a candidate is Christian or not, and their definition of "Christian" excludes Catholics, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and really anyone who isn't a born-again evangelical Protestant of some kind.

            replyreport
            1. 94

               habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               I guess you're right, Jeff, but that's pretty sad...and kinda scary! lol

               replyreport
            2. 77

               Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               I know, hunh?
               This country is still recovering from the horrible lapse of collective Christian judgment (no pun intended) that elected John Fitzgerald Kennedy. And that was more than half a century ago!
               We've already had our aberrant experiment for the 21st Century (in the form of Barack HUSSEIN Obama).
               It's been proven.
               Only white, Christian men are qualified to run this country!!!

               replyreport
               1. 94

                  habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Ha! Girl power!!

                  replyreport
                  1. 77

                     Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     You got it, Habee.
                     The last obvious frontier!
                     And no, it ain't gonna be Bachmann/Palin or Palin/Bachmann, neither!

                     replyreport
                     1. 72

                        Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        Oh, well, there goes all the money I invested in Bachmann-Palin Overdrive T-shirts....

                        replyreport
                        1. 77

                           Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           Very punny!
                           Would their theme song be "American Woman" by the Guess Who, do you think?

                           replyreport
                           1. 72

                              Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              Well, they would "mess your mind..."

                              replyreport
                              1. 77

                                 Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 That's a scary thought.
                                 Stay away from me. Mama (grizzly), let me be!

                                 replyreport
                              2. 77

                                 Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 You've given me an idea.
                                 Maybe time for a suggest the candidates' theme songs hub....
                                 I think I'll go start that right now.
                                 Thanks for the idea.
                                 Sorry your BTO shirts didn't pan out, Jeff.

                                 replyreport
                     2. 94

                        habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        You got that right!

                        replyreport
   5. 60

      logic,commonsenseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Newt will not go far.  He is the flavor of the month and is on his way down in the polls.  He has some very creative ideas, some very intelligent ideas, and he is not into negative campaigning as much as many of the others.  Problem with Newt is he is for sale.
      Romney on the other hand, in truth, has so much money of his own, he won't be bought.  He won't be looking to sell books after his terms are up and he won't need to go on the speech circuit like Clinton, Bush, and soon, Obama.  So he will not be beholden to financial payoffs.
      The guy is genuine.  How many people stay married for 42 years to the same woman these days?  Especially when they have all that money and could buy any woman they wanted.  Look at Kobe.  Look at all the other guys out there with big bucks.  They shed the old model and find a new one.  Kinda like Newt.
      The way he has lived his private life tells a lot about his character.
      That said, I'm still undecided, but I do appreciate a person who is calm, intelligent, and thoughtful.

      replyreport
      1. 94

         habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Yep, with Mitt's looks and money, he could just about have his pick of women. I admire his commitment to his wife and family. I've read what Ann has said about the way he treated her when she was diagnosed with MS, and I was impressed.

         replyreport
2. 58

   MelissaBarrettposted 12 years ago

   Well, Romney is the only republican running that won't result in me moving to Canada if he/she gets elected.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I jez LOVE bombin things!

      replyreport
      1. 72

         Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Bomb, bomb, boooomb
         Bomb, bomb Iran.....

         replyreport
   2. 60

      Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Another, I'm leaving the country blah blah blah threat. Please go and take Alec Baldwin and Barbara Streisand with you.

      replyreport
3. 61

   Cassie Smithposted 12 years ago

   I also think that a good number of Christians won't vote for him because he's a Mormon.

   replyreport
4. 72

   Reality Bytesposted 12 years ago

   Rick Santorum could be a surprise in Iowa.  That just might give him some traction.
   
   I cannot understand why he has not spiked at all. The man is consistent and a TRUE conservative.  This is sure to be an interesting New Year on the political front.  It is still anyone's race.
   
   
   I do not like Newt politically, he is a great writer.  Mitt just seems to be a cookie cutter candidate with no consistency!  He does have the best chance in a general election if it was held today.  Nothing would change though, the Bush/Obama agenda will continue under a Romney administration.
   
   I am hoping that Ron Paul catches the Nation's attention.  He is by far the most consistent and best choice for this Nation at this time in history.  He is also the only candidate whose supporters are true and faithful.  A Ron Paul supporter never sways.  Paul/Santorum  2012?

   replyreport
5. 70

   Cagsilposted 12 years ago

   Mitt isn't smart enough to be POTUS.

   replyreport
   1. 94

      habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I think maybe he's TOO smart to be POTUS! lol

      replyreport
      1. 70

         Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Nope. He already made the critical mistake that will keep him out of office. He announced that he wanted to change Mass' Constitution and eliminate women's rights.
         
         He has already alienated women and that's a stupid move.
         
         
         Edit: His recommended change to Mass' Constitution about abortion is what did him in.

         replyreport
         1. 94

            habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            He didn't alientate women who are against abortion.
            
            I'm not too concerned with social issues right now. I'm more concerned about jobs and the economy, and according to polls, most other American voters feel the same way. If they think Obama has the right ideas, they'll vote for him. If not, they'll vote for someone else. If the economy gets better, I think Obama will def be re-elected.

            replyreport
            1. 70

               Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Good to know.
               Well that goes to show that the distortion tactics from Washington is working on the public.

               replyreport
               1. 94

                  habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  I'm not basing my views on "distortion tactics from Washington" about the economy. I know the economy is bad, and you can't convince me otherwise. My best friend's husband was laid off after 20+ years at the same job, and he can't find another job. My oldest daughter's business is floundering now, and my youngest daughter's husband's work hours were cut last summer and haven't been increased back to normal yet. My middle daughter's fiancee looked for a job for months before he finally found one.

                  replyreport
                  1. 70

                     Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Oh okay. But you seem to think that Government can create jobs, so you've bought into the BS on that aspect.
                     The Economy is bad, but that's because Government is meddling too much, such as ineffective and inefficiently. This is nothing new.
                     It's not that he cannot find a job. It's employers don't want to pay him what he's valued at.
                     That should tell you something other than the Economy being bad?
                     Not doubting it.

                     replyreport
                     1. 94

                        habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        Nope. The friend who lost his job after 20+ years can't find ANY job. He's applied for many $10 an hour jobs. My daughter's business was great until fairly recently.
                        
                        Government doesn't create jobs? What about government workers? lol. Remember, as a teacher, I was paid by state, local, and fed funds.

                        replyreport
                        1. 70

                           Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           Just great, government jobs are not good for the Economy or America in general. I would have figured that almost everyone knew that.
                           
                           Yes Habee, I know what you did for work. And yes I know who paid your salary. The people paid your salary, through state and fed funds.

                           replyreport
                           1. 94

                              habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              What?? I thought the money came from the public education fairy! Dang, now I feel kinda bad about all those millions I willingly took every month.

                              replyreport
                           2. 94

                              habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              So teachers are bad for the economy? Don't blame me - I'm retired now! Seriously, all the taxes I paid (and still pay) should have helped the economy. lol

                              replyreport
                        2. 0

                           oldandwiseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           Actually the economy for most businesses has improved over the past 2 years. They would like you to think otherwise however.

                           replyreport
                           1. 94

                              habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              Then why aren't they hiring?

                              replyreport
                              1. 0

                                 oldandwiseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 The companies that made adjustments are doing well. Those who continued on the same path, went under. Hiring has improved, however most of those jobs are service jobs, as our manufacturing jobs have moved out of the country. Ma & Pas are on an upswing that adapted to the times.

                                 replyreport
                              2. 72

                                 Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 Why aren't profitable companies hiring? Well, a company may be profitable, but demand isn't expanding*.
                                 If demand isn't expanding, that means the company doesn't have customers who wanted to buy its stuff but couldn't because the company hadn't made enough stuff.
                                 As long as there aren't customers trying to buy stuff the company hasn't yet made, the company has no need to expand its workforce.
                                 So they take their profits, and pay some bonuses to their top bosses, pay some dividends to their shareholders (if any), and hang on to the cash for when demand picks up and they have a need to hire someone to make more stuff to meet the demand.
                                 
                                 There's no demand in large part because most of America is struggling financially. The wealth at the top isn't trickling down because wealth doesn't do that.
                                 
                                 *at the moment there's an upswing because of the Christmas season, but that's going to stop tomorrow.

                                 replyreport
                        3. 0

                           oldandwiseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           I agree the wealth isn't trickling down, but in my case business has been on an upswing for the last two years and doing great.

                           replyreport
               2. 0

                  oldandwiseposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  I have to agree, distortion tactics are working.

                  replyreport
6. 77

   Mighty Momposted 12 years ago

   It seems that Newt is fading from favor, even though currently he and Romney are tied in the polls (with Paul third).
   Don't count out Huntsman yet, Habee.
   I think there's a reason he is being sent to North Korea right now.
   No, I don't see any conspiracy in Kim Jong Il's death. Just the timing is unquestionably fortuitous for a candidate who could use the bump in visibility right about.... now. Dictator croaks. Crisis looms.
   And voila. There's goes Mr. Huntsman....
   BTW, Santorum will never, ever get out of the dugout. He's too weird even for the rightiest righties.

   replyreport
7. 0

   oldandwiseposted 12 years ago

   With all the arguing back and forth between the GOP candidates, I believe President Obama will be a shoe in. Economy on the upswing and percentage of unemployed going down.

   replyreport
   1. 72

      Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      You forget that he signed the Defense bill that allows the Army to indefinitely detain US Citizens on US soil without trial, without counsel, and without any due process at all.
      
      That might get enough of his supporters to either stay home or vote for someone else. They probably won't vote GOP, though (I won't, unless the GOP candidate is Ron Paul, and he probably won't be), so it's anybody's election.
      
      I'd rather vote for the Green Party candidate than Obama, or any of the GOP frontrunners.

      replyreport
8. 61

   TMMasonposted 12 years ago

   Mitt Romney is a leftist Progressive. A perfect example of the infection of the Left within the Republican Right. He is everything we Conservatives hate about the EST.

   replyreport
9. 58

   Alternative Primeposted 12 years ago

   Mitt is also -------> Very Confused - condescending - out of touch - shrewd - manipulating - calculating - excessively fickle in policy positions - mechanical - drab - boring - unqualified - opportunist who is an unwavering champion of the extremely wealthy - unconscionably willing to strip social security benefits from our senior citizens at the drop of a $10,000 Dollar Bill in favor of pampering those who need not any pampering - Champion of unclean, toxic, Earth polluting oily fossil fuels at the expense of natural, eco friendly, RENEWABLE "Solar & Wind" research and implementation which is unquestionably our future -   
   
   Have we covered all of his exceedingly admirable attributes and or qualities or just begun?? But ask me and "America" how we truly feel -
   
   A straight faced, "Slightly Lip Twitching Liar" is usually the politically incorrect term used to describe his flimsy wishy washy character by no less than a flock of "Cowboys" I know of - And even though it's admittedly harsh yet exceedingly accurate vernacular, I shall not be the one to utter this phrase in accusation -
   
   "Wrong Wight Wing Weligion" could also be added to the "Mitt Mix"
   
   In keeping with the holiday tradition - *Merry Christmas to All* - EXCEPT "Mitt" ( Unless of course he Immediately repents of his past and future "Mal Positions" )
   
   All this and more from a person who always had previous "Right Wing" leaning tendencies -

   replyreport