Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Just curious about your take on Romney. Forget the fact he isnt Obama...which wont be easy. I am talking about how good of a president do you think he would make. As time goes on I find I am less and less impressed with him. If this is the best we can do I am worried. Whats your take?

I think he's a tard. But he's a much higher quality tard compared to the one we've got in office now. Pretty sad when our Presidential elections come down to picking the best of the worst.

I agree with M4 -i keep kicking myself when i look at the last two Republican candidates, it's like we let the media pick the one their liberal sensitivity can live with rather than picking the guy who stands for what we believe. That said, he is not the Big O and maybe that is just enough

It's a process that we need to keep after. It will take more than one or 2 election cycles to clean this mess up. We need to get behind the real Grass Roots organizations that are saying no the the establishments of both parties. Not that I feel we need a 3rd party but we need to drive out the infestation of the progressive/liberal party in the GOP and the DNC. If the libs policies are so good then they should be able to stand on their own and not hide behind someone else and hide. The Tea Party made a big impact in the 2010 election cycle and it will make an even bigger one in 2012. Once the common man has won back the Government then they can start passing legislation the ensure things like this will not happen again. Like no more life careers for congressmen and senators to start with. JMHO

m4a1mustang wrote:I think he's a tard. But he's a much higher quality tard compared to the one we've got in office now. Pretty sad when our Presidential elections come down to picking the best of the worst.

Riposite wrote:I agree with M4 -i keep kicking myself when i look at the last two Republican candidates, it's like we let the media pick the one their liberal sensitivity can live with rather than picking the guy who stands for what we believe. That said, he is not the Big O and maybe that is just enough.

Except that your choices aren't the best of the worst and it's not enough that Romney isn't Obama to justify voting for Romney. We don't need to wait X presidential cycles when we need action NOW. If only we had a successful Republican governor (executive experience) from a state with 2:1 Democratic voters (shows they can still get things done) and still cut taxes, cut the size of government, and turned a state deficit into a surplus (track record of success). Someone who would be on the ballot in all 50 states. Oh wait, we have that option now in Gary Johnson! I swear, I don't know why this guy gets zero media since he's a two term governor (that's one more term than Romney and 1.5 more terms than Sarah Palin) with all of the track record and none of the Bain Capital or "out of touch with the average American" baggage.

Now before you go all "I'm not going to waste my vote on a 3rd party candidate because he has no chance of winning", you have to think that a good chunk of the Republican party shares your views that they're not satisfied with Romney. Well, you could have had Johnson as the Republican nominee except the media blackballed him as not even being a poll option and thus didn't poll high enough to be in the Republican debates. But you still have a chance to get it right in the national election. Why this guy continues to get zero media attention (other than the media is paid for by the two party system) is beyond me. He's not Obama. He's everything people want Romney to be with none of the baggage. Seems like a slam dunk to me.

Most older Republicans remember what happened the last time there was a big push for a third party candidate. Ross Perot siphoned off enough votes to get Bill Clinton elected the first time.

I certainly am not a big fan of Romney's but so far he's the best we have out in front. Got to support that. A person can make all the "statements" they want with their vote, but a vote for Paul (or anyone else) in a three way race still equals a vote for Obama. Its just plain simple math.

The time for determining the best candidate ( as well as making a statement on political views ) is during the primaries. At this point, the best that can happen is to insure that the incumbent, with his policies, is not validated with reelection.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

ShotgunBlast wrote: Except that your choices aren't the best of the worst and it's not enough that Romney isn't Obama to justify voting for Romney. We don't need to wait X presidential cycles when we need action NOW. If only we had a successful Republican governor (executive experience) from a state with 2:1 Democratic voters (shows they can still get things done) and still cut taxes, cut the size of government, and turned a state deficit into a surplus (track record of success). Someone who would be on the ballot in all 50 states. Oh wait, we have that option now in Gary Johnson! I swear, I don't know why this guy gets zero media since he's a two term governor (that's one more term than Romney and 1.5 more terms than Sarah Palin) with all of the track record and none of the Bain Capital or "out of touch with the average American" baggage.

Now before you go all "I'm not going to waste my vote on a 3rd party candidate because he has no chance of winning", you have to think that a good chunk of the Republican party shares your views that they're not satisfied with Romney. Well, you could have had Johnson as the Republican nominee except the media blackballed him as not even being a poll option and thus didn't poll high enough to be in the Republican debates. But you still have a chance to get it right in the national election. Why this guy continues to get zero media attention (other than the media is paid for by the two party system) is beyond me. He's not Obama. He's everything people want Romney to be with none of the baggage. Seems like a slam dunk to me.

That might be the case, but "a good chunk" is not enough. We need the entire party and lots of independents to rally behind Romney if we want a chance to beat Obama. And face it, beating Obama is FAR more important than getting the "ideal" Republican in the White House.

Ultimately a vote for a third party is going to be a vote for Obama. I'm not going to do that. The idea is to get Romney in, stabilize, and work towards getting the country moving in the right direction again.

WRW wrote:The time for determining the best candidate ( as well as making a statement on political views ) is during the primaries. At this point, the best that can happen is to insure that the incumbent, with his policies, is not validated with reelection.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I agree 100%

It's all political strategy. If your guy doesn't win the primary, you've got to set aside your differences (for now) and support whoever becomes the nominee. Get them in office and then get back to working out your differences.

That's just the way it is. Voting for someone other than Romney in the presidential election is just like shooting yourself in the foot. I don't think we can afford four more years of Obama & friends.

I don't think Ron Paul is going to rally the troops behind Romney because everyone knows Romney shouldn't be the nominee. That could put a nice dent into Romney's chances of winning.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I really hope he isn't that stupid!

Independants will settle the election...in my opinion. Dems and Repubs minds were made up long ago. And Romneys recent trip abroad was somewhat of a public relations disaster. More fodder for the media. He better be a fast learner.

50/50 One time he comes out and nails Obama dead nuts,.Next he reverts back to a PC cat,,,But considering what can happen if Obama gets another term, I can vote for Romney without too much doubt...

Rich wrote:Independants *always* settle the election...in my opinion. Dems and Repubs minds were made up long ago. And Romneys recent trip abroad was somewhat of a public relations disaster. More fodder for the media. He better be a fast learner.

fixed it for ya...

Not impressed by Romney. I never was. I think that he'll make a crappy President.

The thing is, I don't find him to be completely evil. Obama, I believe, is.

SHMIV wrote:Not impressed by Romney. I never was. I think that he'll make a crappy President.

The thing is, I don't find him to be completely evil. Obama, I believe, is.

And that is why I don't think Ron Paul and libertarian supporters are going to vote for Romney. They don't want a slightly less crappy President. They want a President that will start to implement some of the changes this country really needs.

Looks like it'll be another four years of Obama.

This reminds me of the way they talked about Reagan....

I loathe Massholes, and Mittens is the prototypical Masshole. And a Mormon Masshole (Morsshole?) to boot.

I find it hilarious Republicans are pinning their hopes on John Kerry in 2012, because they're the same fckin person in policy and in all likelihood reality. Betcha never seen the two of them together!

Also fascinating is Mittens has only released his tax returns for two years; one from when he entered the nomination race and one from the year before. Would love to see what he was getting up to before that.


So put me under the "not impressed" column.

Ideally Mittens and Obama would just duke it out in the Thunderdome, only to have Mel Gibson swoop in and take them both out to claim his rightful place as Overlord of America.

Sigh, I can dream.

Kreutz wrote:I loathe Massholes, and Mittens is the prototypical Masshole. And a Mormon Masshole (Morsshole?) to boot.

I find it hilarious Republicans are pinning their hopes on John Kerry in 2012, because they're the same fckin person in policy and in all likelihood reality. Betcha never seen the two of them together!

Also fascinating is Mittens has only released his tax returns for two years; one from when he entered the nomination race and one from the year before. Would love to see what he was getting up to before that.


So put me under the "not impressed" column.

Ideally Mittens and Obama would just duke it out in the Thunderdome, only to have Mel Gibson swoop in and take them both out to claim his rightful place as Overlord of America.

Sigh, I can dream.

Last year, I discovered that my older brother, (whom I'd not met at the time) was a Masshole. God certainly has a sense of humor.

I support the Thunderdome movement.

ShotgunBlast wrote:

SHMIV wrote:Not impressed by Romney. I never was. I think that he'll make a crappy President.

The thing is, I don't find him to be completely evil. Obama, I believe, is.

And that is why I don't think Ron Paul and libertarian supporters are going to vote for Romney. They don't want a slightly less crappy President. They want a President that will start to implement some of the changes this country really needs.

Looks like it'll be another four years of Obama.

The only "good" thing about that is the Republicans will probably take over the Senate and win more seats in the House. I can live with Obama as long as the Republicans have control of Congress.