If it quacks like a duck, if it waddles like a duck, well you get the picture.
Must be a far left, big spending socialist (look at Greece and France). Except
that in the USA the far left socialist is named Obama.
Badger55I suggest you update your analysis. The median household
income increased by 4% during the last 4 months of 2011. Nobody is arguing that
the last administration didn't completely destroy the economy and it has
been tough crawling back, but even the statistic you raised points to the fact
that under the competence and leadership of the current administration, things
are getting much better. Why would we want to go backward and
elect another Republican administration?
1 Aggie,Not everyone has investments like 401k. what about housing
investments? How about the fact that the median household income has dropped
$4300 per year since Jan 09. That is something every middle class American can
relate to. Given the fact that Obama said he measures success by how much
additional money is in the pockets of middle class Americans, I would say he is
not successful in that department. His words, not mine.
Doug 10,Romney Balanced a budget and turned a 2-3 billion dollar
deficit into a surplus while governor. He also left a rainy day fund of 2
billion on top of that. Some user fees were increased to cover the cost of
those services. however, excess money from the fees went back to very people
that paid them in the form of tax breaks. Also, the user fees only covered a
few hundred million of the expected 3 billion dollar deficit. What deficit has
Obama cleared up and what budget has he balanced? That's 1-0 for Romney in
that department. A pretty big issue I might add. I will give Romney a shot at
it this time, rather than Obama.
@ DeepPointing out that this is an AP article or that I am free to go to
another site is hardly responsive to my point that the DN prints at least 3
articles about Mitt to 1 about Obama. The Church should divest itself of the DN
or just endorse Romney... that was my point. I note that the DN took
down my post calling Mitt a flip-flopper. I guess they can't tolerate any
unkind posts (even if true) about Romney, despite all the garbage they let
through dragging down our sitting president.To those of you saying
Obama is dragging down the economy, I suggest you look at your own stock (and
401K plan) portfolios. My net worth has almost doubled since Obama took office
in 2009, and yours probably has too.
""vast left-wing conspiracy to work together to put out their message
and to attack me." Mit said...Funny, Hillary said almost the
same thing about the media when her husband was president, except with a minor
twist. It didn't work... only those who wanted to believe it, did.I think there will be plenty who will go along with this argument. I
mean how in the world could anyone ever have a different opinion driven by
different life experiences, and not be part of a larger conspiracy. But then
again, he is probably right. There are those who don't want his as
president, who will conspire to keep him from winning. Just like there are
those who don't want President Obama to have another term, and will
conspire to keep him from winning another election.Funny how it
works that way. Like minded people will vote and promote their candidate. Very sinister indeed.
"...I going to take My chance's with Mitt Romney...".Which Mitt?
"Paul Volcker former GOP fed reserve chairman came out and said if Mitt
institutes his financial program into USA the debt will increase by 2.1
trillion. Hurry up and let me vote for that."Even if that is the
worst case scenario, that's far, far better than the $2 trillion per year
that Obama is increasing. Romney's worst case scenario is better than both
Bush and Obama. There's even a chance worst case won't happen
(actually, worst case is Obama gets re-elected)."I am so tired
of Pres Obama and Mitt Romney talking around other issues but never telling us
how they will fix the deficit spending our Congress is hooked on, how they will
get us out of debt."I think Obama has already shown us what he
plans to do to reduce deficits and debt: he won't! He plans to keep
increasing both. Why on earth would we vote for that? If you are sincerely
worried about this, you'd do what you can to keep Obama from winning
re-election. Even if Romney seems to have some issues, he's better than
Obama, and further searching will help Obama win.
I going to take My chance's with Mitt Romney.I would be crazy to vote
for a guy who has run this country to the ground, and left us all to rot. Obama
Nation has to go.:)
What Mitt on a new "act"?I know Act is the important word
here. Mitt has been able to bend his show wherever he goes and whoever he talks
to, so no change as far as I can see.Whoever said we do not know how
Mitt will govern needs to look at his history. No new taxes in MA but user fees
increase by as much as 700%, that is in no way new taxes...according to Mitt.Mitt has a plan to cut overseas spending by 1/3 of 1%. Be still my
beating heart, just imagine the savings.Paul Volcker former GOP fed
reserve chairman came out and said if Mitt institutes his financial program into
USA the debt will increase by 2.1 trillion. Hurry up and let me vote for
that.I am so tired of Pres Obama and Mitt Romney talking around
other issues but never telling us how they will fix the deficit spending our
Congress is hooked on, how they will get us out of debt.What are
they going to do to educate the population?Two puppets two parties.
Where is the leader we need?
Obama = "backwards community organizer".Romney =
"greedy, flip-flopping, opportunistic corporate raider".While we are throwing labels around, let's give equal time, shall we?
Riverton CougarI think One Old Man feels strongly about gay rights.
At least I have seen that in past posts of his. However he forgets that when
Obama was running for office in 2008 he stated he was a strong advocate of
marriage between one man and one woman.Most recently Obama reports
his views are "evolving" on gay marriage.Sounds like you can
always count on Obama to stick to his guns and never ever say something to
pander to anyone. Flip flopper AND inept. What a combo. Oh...but
he was president when the navy seals took down Osama Bin Laden. A year ago.
That has to be worth at least a book deal one day, but please, not 4 more years
of this economically backwards community organizer. We are headed towards
European socialism at light speed.
Attracting independents is not necessarily an issue of conservative/moderate but
I think has more to do with having a voting record that is based on principles
and not just the party line. In a PPP poll in the past week, they asked
independent voters who they prefer out of Barack Obama and Ron Paul. Ron Paul
leads among that group 55-33. That's a 22 point advantage for someone that
no one would describe as "moderate" or "centrist". I believe it
is because Ron Paul votes based on a set of principles, and doesn't march
lockstep with his party. Independents refuse to join one of the two major
parties for any number of reasons. Wouldn't it make sense that they would
support a candidate that can have opinions outside his party and decide what he
believes without talking to party bosses or donors?
What trully saddens me about both the article and the comments is all the talk
about right, left, center, conservative, liberal, moderate, and not one word
about constitutional principles. All of the above terms are meaningless when it
comes to original intent of our constitutional "republic" form of
government. We are not a democracy ruled by majority but a republic ruled by
constitutional law which has been totally destroyed by both parties. Vote for
Obama if you want to contiune the march towards Marxis socialism if that is what
you want. We know that is what we are getting with Obama. Rommy may at least
slow down that march to socialism somewhat. That remains to be seen. But I
would rather take my chances with an unknown Rommey than a known Obama.
Most centerist politicians have this problem, balancing the extremists while
appealing to the moderates. The far left criticizes Obama and he waffles as has
Romney with the far right. Such etch a sketch (for Romney) and flexibility (for
Obama) are the same thing under different terms. Obama said he would halve the
national debt in his first term. "Knowing where Obama stands" is a day
to day exercise that only Homer Simpson would believe.
Deep, true. But you need to look much further than that number. Politifact
also shows that he compromised on about 100 more and thus gained partial
success.Then you need to ask how much of what Obama promised to try
to do was thwarted simply by political obstructionism by the Party Of No?So should we turn our government over to extreme ideologues who have
pledged to do all they can to stem any hope of progress for common people while
pushing for greater destruction of the middle class?
one old man,So you are saying you will vote for someone who has
shown that he will run our country into the ground, because the alternative is
someone with unknowns, who might run our country into the ground? Completely
logical. Romney might make some bad decisions, it hard to tell, so let's
go with the guy we KNOW will make bad decisions because he is doing it now!Does anybody else see the logic in this?
@ One old manLike Obama's promise to close Guantanamo Bay or
cut the national debt in half by now? Politifact reports Obama has only kept
about 160 of his over 500 campaign promises.Nice try...
@ 1aggieThis AP article was written purposely using terms and
examples to play up the "flip flopper" image. However, there has NEVER
been a Republican presidential candidate in history who hasn't pulled right
for the primary and moved center for the general. It states clearly Romney is
still leaning right even though it is alienating the independents. If you are tired of these opinion pieces read a different website. Most LDS
people are interested in the first Mormon nominee whether they love Mitt Romney
or hate him. Last time I checked there are about a zillion news outlets. Finally, most AP articles I've read here are anything but
complimentary of Romney, so if you think pushing constant negative or neutral
articles about a Presidential candidate constitutes some sort of "glowing
endorsement" then I am speechless to convince you otherwise.
Why can't we have a candidate who stands for what he stands for without
trying to pander to anyone?When people like Mitt try to please
anyone, we wind up with no way to know exactly how they will govern. I find
that very unsettling. So we're expected to vote for all sorts of unknowns?
Like trying to run a ship at full speed through a dense fog.Romney
is dangerous. We can't know what he may do in any given situation. If
he's willing to sell out to extremists and then try to schmooze with less
extreme members of his party, that fogs things up in this voter's mind.I'll be voting for Obama again. I know where he stands even if I
don't always agree.
Why does Romney need to worry about the conservatives anymore? Appeasing
conservatives was needed to land the nomination. He has that. He has to win
the middle to win the general election. The conservatives will vote for him in
the general, because they have no other choice. They certainly aren't
going to vote for Obama.
Whoops. Glenn Beck spoke at Liberty University in 2010. Should have checked
before I said 2009.
Romney will not be the first Mormon to speak at Liberty University. Glenn Beck
spoke at their 2009 graduation. It's surprising that an AP
reporter would get that wrong. Makes you wonder what else he got wrong. Do
these guys do any research at all?