Will Romney be the Next President?

[xkatz]

No kidding. Why the hell didn't conservatives nominate Gary Johnson? The man is so filled with win, I'd vote for him and I lean towards liberalism.

I am actually voting for him. Will he a stand chance? Almost certainly not, but I'd rather vote for someone I believe in (and has a track record to show it) rather than a two-faced demagogue.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

He is the executive of federal law. He oversees the enforcement of the acts of Congress. That is as much the primary responsibility of the office as acting as a military commander-in-chief. Probably moreso unless the country's business is primarily warfare.

I stand corrected.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Mitt will prevail. I'm thinking the Supreme Court will decide Obama's mandate is unconstitutional with a 5 to 4 vote and that will seal the deal.

 

[Revoltingest]

Our political system is irreparably broken.

Such is democracy. But I fear that the fix is even worse.

We have Obama, a well-meaning and intelligent man who is woefully not up to the task of leading the country in dealing with the real issues we face. And there's Romney, who's neither as well-meaning nor as intelligent, nor up to the task, either.

I've yet to see any proof or even slight evidence of Obama's much vaunted intellect. I see only a bungler.
Romney differs in having a track record of management & success. I worry primarily about his pursuing
some deadly foreign policy in the Mid East. But at least he has better hair than Obama.

 

[s2a]

"I've yet to see any proof or even slight evidence of Obama's much vaunted intellect."

Well.. so good of you to dismiss Harvard in lending any especial bone fides...

Perhaps if you might share your own superior command of issues re: intellect or knowledge in comparison with the pathetic Harvard measures of achievement, we'd at least have a new yardstick upon which to measure and compare both the value of your input, and the objective value that Obama might have to offer by comparison...

 

[Revoltingest]

Well.. so good of you to dismiss Harvard in lending any especial bone fides...

We know that he attended a prestigious school. (So did Dubya.) But we know not his grades there.
More important to me though, is Obama's performance in his various professional endeavors.
In the private sector, I see nothing at all. As the VN war was to me, business was to Obama...we're both conscious objectors.
And as prez, I see no cogent reasoning, no keen insight, & only slow learning from experience.
Now this is not to say that he hasn't some giant chess club size brain which is hidden from public view. I only assert that we've no
reason to call him more intelligent than others. Btw, I'd call Clinton the smartest of the recent bunch....immature, but quick as a whip.

Perhaps if you might share your own superior command of issues re: intellect or knowledge in comparison with the pathetic Harvard measures of achievement, we'd at least have a new yardstick upon which to measure and compare both the value of your input, and the objective value that Obama might have to offer by comparison...

Let us not engage in snarky ad hominem drama, eh?
But my primary qualifications to dis the dullard are:
- Mentored many an employee & associate.
- Consumed a great variety of bacon.
- An estimated IQ of almost 70.

 

[tytlyf]

I've yet to see any proof or even slight evidence of Obama's much vaunted intellect.

It's not hard to spot. I can tell he's very intelligent. I guess it's just something us 'Shiners' catch on with.

 

[swamplizard]

I plan on voting for Obama again.

best,
swampy

 

[Revoltingest]

I plan on voting for Obama again.

best,
swampy

Could I bribe you with a nice batch of juicy flies to vote for Gary Johnson?
He's never uttered an unkind word towards reptiles, be they swamp or desert denizens.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Could I bribe you with a nice batch of juicy flies to vote for Gary Johnson?
He's never uttered an unkind word towards reptiles, be they swamp or desert denizens.

It's unfortunate that Gary Johnson is against Net Neutrality, and has no stated policy on health care on his website. Those issues are deal-breakers for me.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's unfortunate that Gary Johnson is against Net Neutrality, and has no stated policy on health care on his website. Those issues are deal-breakers for me.

Ain't nobody poifect.
I don't have any deal breakers. One must look at the sum of traits & likely consequences.
But "net neutrality" could strike him as it does me, ie, government regulation of the internet. I see no usefulness in their intervening.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I'm betting that Romney will be the next president. Romney is projected to out spend Obama by at least 2 to 1.

Who do you think will win? And why?

I hope not. There's a large segment of women voters he's alienated...as well as the LGBT community.

Romney can outspend Obama because he has a lot of banks providing some hefty funding....I think I know where his interest will lie assuming he becomes president...

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Obama. People are fed up with how the right wing does things. Besides, Obama pretty much has the gay vote, the Hispanic vote, and unless something's changed- the African American vote.

There are some women's rights Romney isn't for...which essentially makes the choice easier to vote for Obama.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I thought the Dems had the most money these days. What's your source for Romney outspending Obama 2 to 1?

I think it will be very close.

Romney has a lot of financial institutions (Banks etc.) backing him...

Top Contributors to Mitt Romney | OpenSecrets

This was one source I found.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Obama and Romney have the same money sponsors so it depends on which one can kiss-*** the best?

Can you confirm this? The lists of contributors I've seen are totally different.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I don't have any deal breakers.

You would if you had a chronic condition and the medicine costs a quarter of a million dollars per year.

 

[Revoltingest]

You would if you had a chronic condition and the medicine costs a quarter of a million dollars per year.

No, I'd still take the holistic approach to voting.
Tis easy, since I have the luxury of knowing that my vote will affect no change.
The only personal gain I stand to see is pushing my values.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

No, I'd still take the holistic approach to voting.

If you say so. Here's hoping your hypothesis is never put to the test.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you say so. Here's hoping your hypothesis is never put to the test.

Why? The big picture is always the most important.
If I made things I detest into deal breakers, I'd have no one to vote for.
Of course, that just might please many folk here.

 

[Mister_T]

I'm betting that Romney will be the next president. Romney is projected to out spend Obama by at least 2 to 1. In American politics, the odds that an outspent candidate, such as Obama, will win are 6 in favor to 94 against (or roughly 1 chance in 15). Hence, I'm betting Romney will win the presidency.

Who do you think will win? And why?

I think it's a crap shoot at this point, but I would not be at all surprised if Romney won this election thanks to things such as the SCOTUS ruling that corporations are people now...you can bet your bottom dollar that Romney and the right-wing will be taking full advantage of that this election cycle. Seemed to have worked out well for Scott Walker, outspending his opponent 9 to 1 or something like that.