RINO Romney enters prez race

[BigRob]

I'm observing reality, and yes, that is golden.

You guys have latched onto one candidate after another since November of 2008. They are big in wingnut circles for a little while, and then you find someone else to crush on.

You are not a conservative party. You are a group of John Birch Society radicals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Birch_Society



William Buckley tried to keep your type of nutball out of the Republican party. He succeeded for a long time, but that's all over now. You'll either have to change your ways, or accept that you are going the way of the Whigs.

You seemingly are trying to compare who "wing nut" circles support with what the party as a whole supports. I don't think you can make such a comparison legitimately.

If they are big in "wing nut" circles, then they are not big in the entire party. If they are big within the entire party, then your contention must be that the entire party is a "wing nut" circle...and if that were your contention, you wouldn't have made any distinction.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

I think Romney could beat Obama in a general election (and if I am not mistaken, recent polling shows the same). Romney does have a chance...his issue is going to be getting the nomination, which he will struggle to do.

I don't particularly like Pawlenty or Santorum myself, but I am just one vote.

Romney would have the best shot...after all he can play well to both sides...He is pro choice, believes we should at least consider that global warming may have a impact from pollution, supported cap and trade ( as did McCain) and helped push for a health care mandate to cover everyone under his power....

Unless you want something other then those..as he is perfectly willing to change all of those .... What are you for?
I am for that to! vote Romney...

I doubt he will get the nomination...the Republican party wants a purist super right wing conservative....not someone who can win.

 

[BigRob]

Romney would have the best shot...after all he can play well to both sides...He is pro choice, believes we should at least consider that global warming may have a impact from pollution, supported cap and trade ( as did McCain) and helped push for a health care mandate to cover everyone under his power....

Unless you want something other then those..as he is perfectly willing to change all of those .... What are you for?
I am for that to! vote Romney...

I doubt he will get the nomination...the Republican party wants a purist super right wing conservative....not someone who can win.

Romney is not really pro-choice as you are saying.

That said, in terms of cap and trade, he has been pretty open that he opposes the vision laid out by Obama in that regard...it is in fact Pawlenty who in the past supported carbon caps.

McCain painted Romney as a big Cap and Trade supporter, but the regional initiatives are not really the same as how cap and trade is thought of now.

 

[Rick]

He gave the people he was elected to represent what they wanted.

THE POINT would be that the US isn't Massachusetts.

As for the abortion issue, so what? He has stated he has had a change of heart and is pro-life now...I seem to recall another Governor doing that.. Ronald Reagan.

Reagan later felt it was one of the worst mistakes he ever made, supporting temporarily abortion. That's TOTALLY distinguishable from a cynical opportunist like Romney, who turns on a dime when it is politically expedient.

As for gay-marriage....I think you are wrong...I am pretty sure he opposed gay marriage as a candidate for Governor, but he supported basically equal rights for gays under the law. That is not supporting gay marriage.

For a flip flopper, and person who's made such inconsistent distinctions, nobody would know what they were getting.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Romney is not really pro-choice as you are saying.

That said, in terms of cap and trade, he has been pretty open that he opposes the vision laid out by Obama in that regard...it is in fact Pawlenty who in the past supported carbon caps.

McCain painted Romney as a big Cap and Trade supporter, but the regional initiatives are not really the same as how cap and trade is thought of now.

my point was that he changed positions on all of those...and the right will never let him win because of that...you have seen the republican base the last year right? the ones that think Newt is a far left liberal? ( and newt thinks are to far right even)

 

[BigRob]

THE POINT would be that the US isn't Massachusetts.

Your statement makes no sense...Romney let the people of Massachusetts have what they want. In terms of the United States as a whole, he has already stated his first act would be an Executive Order allowing states to opt out of Obamacare....

Unless your assertion is that the majority of people wanted Obamacare, your argument does not really make sense, because if the people he represented didn't want it, he would not push it.

Reagan later felt it was one of the worst mistakes he ever made, supporting temporarily abortion. That's TOTALLY distinguishable from a cynical opportunist like Romney, who turns on a dime when it is politically expedient.

How many times has Romney changed on the abortion issue exactly? As I understand it, he came to office in MA on the platform of he wouldn't push to outlaw it, even though he disagreed with it personally

For a flip flopper, and person who's made such inconsistent distinctions, nobody would know what they were getting.

What specific issues are you arguing he continually (if ever) flip flops on?

I have to agree with the National Review when they "Romney is a full-spectrum conservative: a supporter of free-market economics and limited government, moral causes such as the right to life and the preservation of marriage, and a foreign policy based on the national interest."

 

[Pepper]

I think Romney could beat Obama in a general election (and if I am not mistaken, recent polling shows the same). Romney does have a chance...his issue is going to be getting the nomination, which he will struggle to do.

I don't particularly like Pawlenty or Santorum myself, but I am just one vote.

One ABC News poll showed that, all the others showed Obama winning. But for some "mysterious" reason, you guys only know about the one poll.

You seemingly are trying to compare who "wing nut" circles support with what the party as a whole supports. I don't think you can make such a comparison legitimately.

If they are big in "wing nut" circles, then they are not big in the entire party. If they are big within the entire party, then your contention must be that the entire party is a "wing nut" circle...and if that were your contention, you wouldn't have made any distinction.

I think the entire GOP, as an organization, has been taken over by the wingnuts. Thus you have candidates who want to end Medicare, who will never agree to a tax hike, even if that tax hike is necessary to fund a war that they support, who don't believe in human caused global warming, who don't believe in evolution, who insist that the founders set this nation up as a "Christian nation", who want torture to be an accepted tactic, who want to privatize schools, prisons, roads, and anything else that they can come up with....yes, all of these are big in the party, and all of them are wingnut ideas.

 

[Hobo1]

Now let's get our definitions straight so the Libs and the Conservatives are all on the same page:
* Wingnut, a name for an eccentric person

* Wingnut (squat), a series of squatted warehouses, apartment buildings, and houses in Cleveland, Ohio
* Wingnut, a term to describe a fan of the Detroit Red Wings
* Wingnut ear, a derogatory term for, or a person with, ears that stick out

* Wingnut (haircut), New Zealand slang for someone who had the "short-back and sides" haircut style of the 1940s and 50s
* Wingnut, military slang for members of the United States Air Force
* Wingnut, a term to describe a fan of the NBC television drama series The West Wing
* Wingnut, a person with a hobby-level of interest in the White House and its architecture, and/or the Presidency of the United States
* Wingnut, a person who is crazy about all things that fly
* Wingnut, a Honda Gold Wing motorcycle enthusiast

 

[PLC1]

One ABC News poll showed that, all the others showed Obama winning. But for some "mysterious" reason, you guys only know about the one poll.



I think the entire GOP, as an organization, has been taken over by the wingnuts. Thus you have candidates who want to end Medicare, who will never agree to a tax hike, even if that tax hike is necessary to fund a war that they support, who don't believe in human caused global warming, who don't believe in evolution, who insist that the founders set this nation up as a "Christian nation", who want torture to be an accepted tactic, who want to privatize schools, prisons, roads, and anything else that they can come up with....yes, all of these are big in the party, and all of them are wingnut ideas.

Which is why the party should nominate Romney, or someone like him (not yet declared) who neither rides a Honda Goldwing, is eccentric, nor makes up words as they go along.

 

[BigRob]

One ABC News poll showed that, all the others showed Obama winning. But for some "mysterious" reason, you guys only know about the one poll.

Did a recent poll show what I said it did? Yes or no?
Do you also gloss over state wide polls that show Obama struggling in battle ground states. (like this one) Yes or no?

The fact that anyone in beating the President in any polls two years out from the election is somewhat telling.

I think the entire GOP, as an organization, has been taken over by the wingnuts. Thus you have candidates who want to end Medicare, who will never agree to a tax hike, even if that tax hike is necessary to fund a war that they support, who don't believe in human caused global warming, who don't believe in evolution, who insist that the founders set this nation up as a "Christian nation", who want torture to be an accepted tactic, who want to privatize schools, prisons, roads, and anything else that they can come up with....yes, all of these are big in the party, and all of them are wingnut ideas.

Most Republicans do not want to end Medicare...and not agreeing to a tax hike under any circumstances is no more absurd than the Democratic fairy tale that we can cut taxes for 95% of the country, raise taxes on the "rich", and solve all of our problems.

Additionally, many Republicans believe that man does play a role in global warming..the issue is how much of a role...a position held by many respected scientists.

I seem to recall Democratic leadership keeping their mouth shut on the torture issue as well...and it was House Democrats after all that eliminated the “Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Interrogation Act of 2010,” an amendment to a funding act which would have criminalized the torture or other abuse of detainees.

Your problem is you believe everyone with a different set of ideals is a "wing nut."

 

[Pepper]

Did a recent poll show what I said it did? Yes or no?
Do you also gloss over state wide polls that show Obama struggling in battle ground states. (like this one) Yes or no?

The fact that anyone in beating the President in any polls two years out from the election is somewhat telling.

I already explained this to you. A single poll said Romney would come out ahead, and about six others show an opposite outcome.

We are not two years out. We are less than 18 months out.

Most Republicans do not want to end Medicare...and not agreeing to a tax hike under any circumstances is no more absurd than the Democratic fairy tale that we can cut taxes for 95% of the country, raise taxes on the "rich", and solve all of our problems.

Your party leadership is on board with Paul Ryan's plan.

Additionally, many Republicans believe that man does play a role in global warming..the issue is how much of a role...a position held by many respected scientists.

Actually, no. The overwhelming opinion of scientists is that we are facing a man made problem.

I seem to recall Democratic leadership keeping their mouth shut on the torture issue as well...and it was House Democrats after all that eliminated the “Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Interrogation Act of 2010,” an amendment to a funding act which would have criminalized the torture or other abuse of detainees.

They were not silent, but they should have spoken up more loudly.

Your problem is you believe everyone with a different set of ideals is a "wing nut."

Your problem is that you think that. Or at least one of your problems.

Wingnuts is a term for right wing extremist nuts. People with extremist views.

 

[BigRob]

I already explained this to you. A single poll said Romney would come out ahead, and about six others show an opposite outcome.

We are not two years out. We are less than 18 months out.

So you agree that everything I stated was indeed accurate...as I said.

The main point is that 18 months is forever in an election cycle. Looking at a poll today (either way) and saying "oh, X is winning, therefore they will win" is a waste of time.

Your party leadership is on board with Paul Ryan's plan.

Ryan's plan hardly "eliminates" Medicare. That is just wrong.

Actually, no. The overwhelming opinion of scientists is that we are facing a man made problem.

I think the overwhelming opinion is that man plays a role, and the debate is to what extent.

They were not silent, but they should have spoken up more loudly.


Your problem is that you think that. Or at least one of your problems.

Wingnuts is a term for right wing extremist nuts. People with extremist views.

If you are stating a debate from a viewpoint that certain legislation does things that it does not actually do, and then using that basis to call people who might support such legislation "wing nuts", there is not much point in discussing it further.

I might suggest you read the Ryan proposal... not the talking points about, the actual thing. Then see what you think.

 

[Pepper]

So you agree that everything I stated was indeed accurate...as I said.

No, I implied what I'm going to tell you straight out now. You are cherry picking polls to suit your ego.

The main point is that 18 months is forever in an election cycle. Looking at a poll today (either way) and saying "oh, X is winning, therefore they will win" is a waste of time.

Then why are you doing it?

Ryan's plan hardly "eliminates" Medicare. That is just wrong.

It makes the program useless to most older people. A voucher system will not work.

I think the overwhelming opinion is that man plays a role, and the debate is to what extent.

The scientific consensus is that it's human caused. The debate against it is from a few, and their rationales are all over the place.

If you are stating a debate from a viewpoint that certain legislation does things that it does not actually do, and then using that basis to call people who might support such legislation "wing nuts", there is not much point in discussing it further.

Then it's a good thing I'm not doing that!

I might suggest you read the Ryan proposal... not the talking points about, the actual thing. Then see what you think.

Ryan proposes a voucher system. That is unworkable. Nothing more needs to be said.

 

[Rick]

Your statement makes no sense...Romney let the people of Massachusetts have what they want. In terms of the United States as a whole, he has already stated his first act would be an Executive Order allowing states to opt out of Obamacare....

You are too dull to grasp the point. Pro-abortion in one office, anti in the next? Why can't he just be replaced by a computer? Maybe not you, but most people want candidates of PRINCIPLE. If the polls change and more people become pro-abortion, he'll flip again and that's fine with you??

How many times has Romney changed on the abortion issue exactly? As I understand it, he came to office in MA on the platform of he wouldn't push to outlaw it, even though he disagreed with it personally

This is the standard lame-ass claim, it isn't worth the airwaves it floats on and pollutes. Anyone who isn't pro-life is pro-abortion - they maintain if only through inaction the status quo of the Holocaust.

What specific issues are you arguing he continually (if ever) flip flops on?

Abortion, gays - read up, I'm out of the tutoring business.

 

[PLC1]

You are too dull to grasp the point. Pro-abortion in one office, anti in the next? Why can't he just be replaced by a computer? Maybe not you, but most people want candidates of PRINCIPLE. If the polls change and more people become pro-abortion, he'll flip again and that's fine with you??




This is the standard lame-ass claim, it isn't worth the airwaves it floats on and pollutes. Anyone who isn't pro-life is pro-abortion - they maintain if only through inaction the status quo of the Holocaust.






Abortion, gays - read up, I'm out of the tutoring business.

and a good thing it is for all of us.

Romney was for a state (Mass) reforming health care in that state, he is for the states having the right to opt out of "Obamacare."

He is not in favor of abortion himself, but is against the federal government deciding when a woman may or may not abort.

Sounds pretty consistent to me.