Comments about ‘Mitt Romney fares well in poll, nets key California support’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, June 23 2011 9:46 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
CaliforniaCougar
Lake Elsinore, CA

Mitt/Jimmer 2012

USAlover
Salt Lake City, UT

If your knee hurts, would you schedule an appointment with your hair dresser?

If you need to fix the economy and create jobs, would you elect a law professor who never created a job, balanced a payroll or managed a city, state or business?

Mitt Romney 2012!

The Rock
Federal Way, WA

The Mitt/Jimmer 2012 ticket would certainly carry Glen's Falls, NY.
Not sure that Jimmer would want to tarnish his reputation with politics.

Mitt is a good man. He has said many things that I wish that he had not said.
We must change the direction of this country while we still have a country. To that end it is good that the Republicans have somebody that is breaking out into the lead.

Mitt's credentials on the economy are unassailable.
Mitt has the executive experience and savvy to do the job.

I just hope his "open minded" approach does not lead him to deviate too far from the founding principles of this nations that allow freedom to exist.

If people start making his religion an issue his people need to take a page from the Democrat play book and call them all religious bigots just like they call anyone who disagrees with Obama a racist.

It's time to burn the race card!

splitme2
West Jordan, UT

It's a good thing the election is over a year away. I just can't bring myself to vote for Mitt. Maybe there will be an independent I like!

Tom in CA
Vallejo, CA

"I just can't bring myself to vote for Mitt. Maybe there will be an independent I like!"

splitme2:

Your other option is to vote for Obama. Now what will you do??

Tom in CA
Vallejo, CA

The way things are looking with all of the current polling - it appears all the "Mormon stuff" is becoming a distant memory and old news. No longer a negative factor politically. That will bode well for Romney in '12.

Obama's gamble last night will factor in his demise.

crowntown1
Corona, CA

The Mormon news will be brought up again and again don't you worry. They just need to be running on a platfrom that is consistent with his religon's views or the liberal media will eat him alive. Just stand and not waiver from what your beliefs are he should be fine.

greenman108
Petaluma, CA

one poster above says, "the Mormon stuff" no longer matters. I am sorry to relay the facts to you, but in the actual story this thread is about it says the following: "Seventy-one percent of voters say Romney's LDS religion doesn't matter." 71 from 100 is 29. 29% of respondents say it does matter to them. PS. That 29% has held steady from prior polling.

As for the claim above that Mitt is a good choice based on his business experience, the part where Bain fired 100's of Americans and shipped their jobs to China is going to be featured in ads, and so is the part where Bain caused the bankruptcy of some companies it took over.

GoodGuyGary
Houston, TX

@splitme2:

Have you ever seen an independent to win the election? If you vote for the independent, that means you vote will be wasted. Why not cast it for the best candidiates on the ballot that will alos have chance to win (i.e. Romney)

Romney for 2012.

coltakashi
Richland, WA

Many of the good folks who have gotten energized by the Tea Party movement think that electing a member of Congress who represents a single congressional district should be the same as electing a single national president who is voted on by all 50 states PLUS the District of Columbia.

Electing a conservative Representative works fine. You can get a sizable majority in your district, elect a strong conservative, and with enough conservative districts electing such people, you get a majority in the House, and can pass legislation, even though many districts across the country are strongly liberal.

But electing a president is different. The only way to control the power of the presidency is to find someone from your party who will work with all those conservatives in Congress BUT also appeals to enough independents and less liberal people in the Democratic Party that he or she can get elected by a majority of the whole country. America is too evenly split overall for a Republican to get elected who isn't able to pull support from the middle of the spectrum.

coltakashi
Richland, WA

Let me explain further why this is so. Almost every one of the 50 states has a "winner take all" system for electoral votes. In California, there are 53 congressional districts. That means it gets 53+2=55 electoral college votes. There are 19 of those districts that have elected Republicans to Congress, about one third. Those 19 can help form a large majority in the House, but in the other 24 districts, most votes will go to the Democratic candidate, and then ALL 55 electoral votes go to the Democrats. The 19 Republican districts don't count to elect the president at all!

It would be desirable to get rid of "winner-take-all" voting in states, and allocated electoral votes to match the congressional districts, with the 2 "Senate" electoral votes to the majority winner. Then a conservative majority in the House would almost guarantee a win by a conservative president.

But until that change is made, presidential candidates have to get enough votes from the middle of the voter spectrum to get "swing states" like Ohio on their side, to get elected. That is why Mitt Romney can win the White House but Ron Paul cannot.

David
Centerville, UT

Romney is change I can believe in.

But so would just about any Republican when running against Obama.

Hope and change. That sums it up nicely.

greenman108
Petaluma, CA

The only way to control the power of the presidency is to find someone from your party who will work with all those conservatives in Congress BUT also appeals to enough independents and less liberal people in the Democratic Party that he or she can get elected by a majority of the whole country. America is too evenly split overall for a Republican to get elected who isn't able to pull support from the middle of the spectrum.

--
Or you can make it harder for liberals to vote. The new GOP idea is to require the poor and college students to come up with ID that they dont have or need except to vote.

Lee Moody
Cedar City, UT

"Bain caused the bankruptcy of some companies it took over." Not totallly true.The companies that Bain worked with were given recommendations and Romney's people stayed for months to help implement the changes. He got rid of inefficient workers (deadwood) and sometimes it hurt at the beginning.
deadwood will cry (sometimes in advance) that Mitt is causing their miseries. He got hired to do a job and he did it well. some of the companies that did not follow the plans failed. The majority succeeded and revived their companies, creating more jobs and profitting in the long run. That's what we need in our country.

Maryquilter
Farmington, UT

@David: Change simply for the sake of change can be dangerous. Although I usually vote Democrat, I would cross party lines if I saw a Republican candidate who had viable, concrete alternatives to what Obama has tried to accomplish. So far I have not seen anyone like that, Mitt included. I would have voted for Romney before he started flip-flopping on issues he once stood for in order to pander to the national voters. I'm not saying a politician can't change their mind on an issue once in a while, but to me he was just tickling the ears of the conservative voters. I liked Huntsman o.k. as governor of Utah, but I see him following in Mitt's footsteps as far as changing views and pandering.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments