Braineack

iTrader: (62)

trollin' no, I just get wound up.

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

Why should a Republican-oriented voter not vote for Mitt Romney? Bonus points for citing specific examples or sources for said reasons.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

If he wins the nominate, I wouldn't not vote for him.

but that's only cause I'm racist and fascist.

FRT_Fun

iTrader: (19)

IF he (romney) wins, Obama starts to not look so bad. I'd rather go with a known entity than some douchebag that could screw us all.

It's Ron Paul or bust for me.

Are that many people so stupid that RP only got 7% of the votes. Bring RP back to TX, let's make TX it's own country and RP can be king.

mgeoffriau

iTrader: (7)

If Romney's the GOP nominee, I'd seriously consider not voting for him in the general election, for the following reasons:

1. I don't live in a swing state. I could vote for David Mamet and it wouldn't matter.
2. Even if I did live in a swing state, I don't consider another 4 years of Obama something to fear more than 4 or 8 years of Romney. If anything, Romney's quasi-conservative centrist talk may allow him to "accomplish" more things I'd rather not see accomplished, and a GOP presidency could also swing the next congressional elections back toward the Democrats.
3. While I am an ardent Ron Paul supporter, I recognize his candidacy is the very definition of long shot. As such, I am willing to consider his success in terms of media exposure to his ideas and principles, and as such, any percentage of votes he wins increases public attention.

He'd never accept.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

mark is too smart.

viperormiata

iTrader: (24)

Elections are stupid and so are presidents. We need a holistic approach to government so that people can get their aura in line and be in tune with the earth.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

do we all have to carry hoaning forks?

y8s

iTrader: (8)

whoever passes marriage equality so the gays can marry in any state.

I don't care about the religious implications of the institution of marriage. There are LEGAL ramifications to marriage that should be universal and not restricted to homophob--er I mean heterosexual couples only. And there are Christian homosexuals.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

get rid of the IRS and it wouldnt even be an issue, there'd be no point other than tradition and to get special privledges--like recieving my benefits if i die, making medical decisions for me, etc.

y8s

iTrader: (8)

or being able to be in the same room as your dying loved ones that aren't allowed to be family.

and bullsh1t on your ninja edit about it not being a state issue. it's a national issue because it's a civil right.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

10th admendment. if it wasn't a special club in which to recieve special things in the first place, then it would be a non-issue.

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

Soooo... we've got:

• Romney might be worse than Obama - with no definition regarding in what ways he might be worse
• He might get more done than other options, which would be bad, but no specifics on what types of things he might get done that would be bad
• A Republican president might mean more Democrat congresspeople in the future

I guess I'll wait until blaen gets in here. He's talked enough smack about Romney that I assume he has a list of things that are bad about him.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

romney is the lesser of two evils.

but as you bullet points...that's just how it works, if the republican doesnt run as a hardcore conservative, he gets 1 term and is run out by a democrat, they ---- ---- up worse, and we get another republican...always house democratic congress so it really doesn't matter.

untill the republican party can stick to it's core values, it's just going to result in another democrat in office in 2018 and a democratic majority congress in the meantime. mark my words.

and everyone will blame bush.

y8s

iTrader: (8)

you're right. it should be a constitutionally protected right.

mgeoffriau

iTrader: (7)

I understand what you're getting at, but underlining "might" as if the fact that none of us can predict the future (and certainly can't predict what a politician may and may not do once in office) is somehow a mark against our arguments...well, it seems a bit unrealistic. What exactly were you expecting to hear?

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

not necessarily.

DontPassTheFence

Gonna say I voted for Ron Paul, but Arizona is a waste of a vote in general. Romney will win Arizona.

EDIT: Not that any of it matters anyways, AZ is like 2 electoral votes, right? olololol

Sparetire

No option for moving to Canada. Fail.

Sparetire

That would be....nobody.

Nobody has the ***** or inclination (no pun intended..OK maybe sorta) to handle that issue except maybe Obama. He has other priorities. Which sucks, because I would be a lot happier if he was focused on something like that instead of feeding me to Aetna and finding some BS green job for me to do that results in my having no higher cognitive functioning and/or trying to neuter my 2nd amendment rights.