Our possible replacement...

[Redpb]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srbX26vp57c

ahhh hell, I guess it's either him or the former crack addict.

[moabfool]

Yah, it's between him and the guy the doesn't know how many states there are.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws

On a side note, there are 57 Islamic States.

[DiscGo]

What a crazy political time that these are the two choices left.

[Mtnman1830]

My vote is for "NONE OF THE ABOVE"

[moabfool]

What a crazy political time that these are the two choices left.

Left, LOL. That's where they both stand. One might get elected because he's playing the "It's Time For a (insert protected status here) to be President" card. The other is a RINO (Republican In Name Only). We're screwed.

[James_B_Wads2000]

Ha ha you Republicans are screwed! :haha: I like John McCain because the die hard conservatives think he is too liberal. McCain too liberal

[moabfool]

[quote=James_B_Wads2000]Ha ha you Republicans are screwed! :haha: I like John McCain because the die hard conservatives think he is too liberal. McCain too liberal

[bbennett]

What happened to the Truman's and the Roosevelt's of the world. I don't remember ever having anyone decent to vote for. How can they say that every vote counts when there's only two douche bags that you can choose from. I know there are others running but these two are the only ones that actually stand a chance. I don't think I'll even bother this time.

[DiscGo]

Guiliani ran a dumb campaign but I believe he would have been a great President.

[BruteForce]

This election year (as most in my recollection) really sucks. Although I favor McCain and generally fall in a mostly conservative view-point, I hope its not another GW Bush, Part 2 Administration (should he be elected).

On the other hand, and being totally NON-PC (as is usually my style), I just can't in good conscience vote for Obama. He speaks eloquently about issues, but is far too liberal and too junior to be seriously considered. I also disagree with his foreign positions (Iraq, etc). He is NOT the Messiah the press make him out to be.

Where's another Roosevelt or Eisenhower when we need one? Why is it that for the last 40+ years, we've always had to pick one of two terrible turds to be elected? Why have we allowed our system to require a candidate to be a multi-millionaire?

On a sidenote, I understand Congress is considering a bill to eliminate the Electoral College; if that happens we'll become a complete Socialist country - God help us then!

As an additional side-note, Duncan Hunter may have made a good candidate.

[moabfool]

Guiliani ran a dumb campaign but I believe he would have been a great President.

People who were running that would've been better IMNSHO

-Thompson
-Romney (he's still be in it if he would've kept his story straight)
-Guiliani (Sorry Rocky Anderson, America can only have one mayor).

and I've almost changed my mind about Hillary. Her biggest mistake is being married to Bill.

I got this in an e-mail. It's outdated, but I still think it's funny.

We, in Ireland, can't figure out why people are even bothering
to hold an election in the United States.

On one side, you have a bitch who is a lawyer that's married to a
lawyer, running against a lawyer that's married to a bitch who
is a lawyer.

On the other side, you have a war hero who is married to a hot blonde who owns a beer distributorship.

What are you lads thinking over there?'

[BruteForce]

We, in Ireland, can't figure out why people are even bothering
to hold an election in the United States.

On one side, you have a bitch who is a lawyer that's married to a
lawyer, running against a lawyer that's married to a bitch who
is a lawyer.

On the other side, you have a war hero who is married to a hot blonde who owns a beer distributorship.

What are you lads thinking over there?'

Ha! I got that message too. It's just about on-target!

[James_B_Wads2000]

On a sidenote, I understand Congress is considering a bill to eliminate the Electoral College; if that happens we'll become a complete Socialist country - God help us then!

I haven't heard that one. Got any sources? Doesn

[Randi]

Guiliani ran a dumb campaign but I believe he would have been a great President.

Serj for President!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy6eingHcOs

I LOVE this guy!
:nomystery:
He's my hero!!!!
If he ran, I'd vote for him!

[moabfool]

[quote=James_B_Wads2000]The way that Utahans talk up Romney is such a thin veiled attempt to try and make it look like you are not just voting in a fellow Mo-mo. These are the same people that get so pissed when African Americans say they will vote for Obama because he is black

[James_B_Wads2000]

[quote=moabfool]

[moabfool]

I think Romney is insane to any rational person who listens to him speak.

Exactly how I feel about Obama and his party. Heck, I feel that way about a good chunk of what McCain says. My mileage definitely does vary.

While I will never agree that it's "time" for a black or a woman to be president (that implies that gender or race superceeds genuine ability), I will say that I think America is ready (implies a social climate change/preparation, not a need) for a black or a woman to be president, which is a much needed change. When the right one runs for the office I'll vote for them. Maybe in 2012 :ne_nau: .

[DiscGo]

I don't know any liberals who were going to vote for Romney because he was Mormon (and a lot of my family friends are teachers and so by default are all democrats :)). These Mormons friends are all Obama supporters. A lot of black people including conservatives support Obama because of his color and have openly admitted it.

Just because you dislike Romney doesn't mean he is insane. I'd be curious what it is you don't like about him? He was a democrat in the 90's and is now a Republican. He switched his view on abortion which now coincides with the Republican party and he developed an innovative solution to health care in MA as Governor and has a deep understanding of the economy.

Romney was not my first pick for President but there isn't anything horrible about him. His wife didn't make any comments about being "the first time she was proud to be an American", he had a platform that was striaght forward and addressed the issues.

Obama speaks in an ideal fashion but seldom really addresses the issues and when he does he is usually on the wrong side of them (if you are against socialism). He does not have much in the way of experience because half of his time in the national political scene has been open campaigning for the Presidency and all he really has going for him is that he is an incredible speaker and does do a very effective job of promising hope (something our country currently needs). As much as he promises it, I don't know a politician that stays in office who fulfills campaign promises.


So in the end Romney had the political views of many conservative Mormons which makes sense they would support him and Obama has a very liberal stance which makes no sense for conservatives to support him. So as much as you would like to call the Mormons hypocrites for supporting a Mormon who is in line with their views, you are just way off on this one.


As I said before he wasn't my top pick but he was the top pick for several of my non-Mormon friends.

[James_B_Wads2000]

I think Romney is insane to any rational person who listens to him speak.

Exactly how I feel about Obama and his party. Heck, I feel that way about a good chunk of what McCain says. My mileage definitely does vary.

Good then we can agree to disagree. That

[Deathcricket]

I don't know if that's a fair trade though. Being Mormon has a whole bunch of ideals that come along with it. Religious views are central to ones character and voting strategy. So i can see being a Mormon and voting for a fellow Mormon. Same beliefs, so they feel the same on most issues.

I do agree with your line of thinking "let not vote for Obama cause he's black and it would be cool to witness the 1st black president in my lifetime, who cares where he stands on issues" debate though.

[James_B_Wads2000]

I don't know any liberals who were going to vote for Romney because he was Mormon (and a lot of my family friends are teachers and so by default are all democrats :)). These Mormons friends are all Obama supporters. A lot of black people including conservatives support Obama because of his color and have openly admitted it.

I can

[DiscGo]

Well made arguments. I disagree with them but I at least appreciate knowing they are well thought out.



I don't know if you missed the other topics but we already had some big debates on this site about staunch black republicans who are voting for Obama because of his skin.


Romney does represent the views of many Mormons, so of course many Mormons are going to like him. McCain (and his mother) have made horrible comments about Mormons, so he isn't going to win here (normally) so Romney had a shoe in election here. I do believe you would have seen a different election in Utah if Giuliani had still been in the race.


In the end I believe you think that Mormons voted for Romney solely because he is Mormon and I don't think you realize how much of Romney's campaign represent conservatives.


Romney has a great track record, both politically and financially. Obama does not have nearly the experience as most and that is a scary position to have someone enter without a lot of experience.


For the record often the best suited person for the job is not the person with the most experience, so the fact that he is so new to the political scene isn'tnecessarilyy a bad thing. But his politics are hardly encouraging those who fear our country becoming socialist.

[moabfool]

[quote=James_B_Wads2000] I will say this though, before Romney admitted defeat

[James_B_Wads2000]

Well made arguments. I disagree with them but I at least appreciate knowing they are well thought out.

Thanks. I appreciate you taking the time to read them and hear me out.


In the end I believe you think that Mormons voted for Romney solely because he is Mormon and I don't think you realize how much of Romney's campaign represent conservatives.

I believe that most voted that way because he is Mormon or at least were influenced more than they are willing to admit. But I must admit that this is my own asshole opinion that is basically not provable.


Romney has a great track record, both politically and financially. Obama does not have nearly the experience as most and that is a scary position to have someone enter without a lot of experience.

To-may-to. to-ma-to. It doesn

[James_B_Wads2000]

When one considers that Utah is <70% Mormon the statistic takes on a whole new light. It shows that Romney spoke to the people of Utah on a level beyond religion.

Considering that only registered Republicans could vote in the primary then I would say that population segment is >70% Mormon or inactive Mormon. It he was just wildly popular and Utah wasn

[moabfool]

[quote=James_B_Wads2000]You know my nephew just came back from his mission to Detroit and he was saying a lot of the same things you are. Now I know him better than I know you, but he was and is a pretty sheltered kid and he saw his time on his Mission as his first venture into the real world. But I am afraid all he did is take his preconceived notions out there and saw proof to what he already thought he knew. I hope the same did not happen to you.

Does welfare work for everybody? No. Will there always be lazy people who abuse the system? Yes. Just because you can give me three examples of it not working or three-hundred doesn

[James_B_Wads2000]

Would 3,000 examples be enough, or 300,000? I can give them to you, and you don't have to travel very far to find them (not all 300k).

This is the problem with your logic. You see some examples or many examples and you think you can extrapolate those results to the entire system. You saw the truth where you want to see it. You saw people who you thought were living wrong compared to the standard you had been taught. So therefore you assume that everyone not living the standard is living wrong. You already know the answer before you ask the question.


As for you nephew, I doubt he had any pre-conceived notions about much of anything when he went to Detroit except that it was a scary place. He probably didn't have a clue what to be scared of or the root causes of that city's reputation. As a result his opinions were most likely formed from first-hand experience. His opinions were formed first-hand, not sitting in front of the talking heads.

Trust me you don

[moabfool]

Would 3,000 examples be enough, or 300,000? I can give them to you, and you don't have to travel very far to find them (not all 300k).

This is the problem with your logic. You see some examples or many examples and you think you can extrapolate those results to the entire system. You saw the truth where you want to see it. You saw people who you thought were living wrong compared to the standard you had been taught. So therefore you assume that everyone not living the standard is living wrong. You already know the answer before you ask the question.


There is no problem with my logic, and I am no different than you in seeing truth where I want to see it. Both of us are convinced that our POV is correct at the expense of the other. The fact is that one of us is wrong and the other is right. Logic and reason will not change this. I think I'm right and you think you're right. Only time will tell which one of us it is.

I did not extrapolate my experiences into the entire system. Where, in any of my posts, did I say that public assistance didn't help in some way? Where, in any of my posts, did I say that there weren't people who genuinely need the support of the general population? Just to be clear on this point, I believe that there are such people, and that we, as a society, have an obligation to support them (qualifications are age, disability, military widow, etc...). But the fact remains that there are people who are receiving such support that do not deserve it, and that they constitute the vast majority of those receiving such support. If a person or a couple can support themselves and their family they have a moral and ethical obligation to do so. Yes, that was how I was raised. If you think it's not right I pitty you. You have a serious moral obstacle to overcome IMNSHO. And I'm confident that there are a great many answers you think you know before you ask the question. The difference between you and me is that I am mature enough to recognize it. Call me closed minded if you will (the most lame of all liberal tactics), but you will be wrong. It is not closed minded to analyze a philosopy, based on its merits, or lack thereof, and then reject it.


[quote=moabfool]As for you nephew, I doubt he had any pre-conceived notions about much of anything when he went to Detroit except that it was a scary place. He probably didn't have a clue what to be scared of or the root causes of that city's reputation. As a result his opinions were most likely formed from first-hand experience. His opinions were formed first-hand, not sitting in front of the talking heads.

Trust me you don

[James_B_Wads2000]

Wow! I thought if I kept posting back you would just give up and ignore me

[moabfool]

[quote=James_B_Wads2000]Wow! I thought if I kept posting back you would just give up and ignore me