Newt or Mitt if you had to decide.

[army bratt]

wrong answer!!!!! its newt for me cause mitt is something i play ball with. since i cant rely on a career in baseball, i dont need a mitt. newt is missunderstood because of the media. they dont want him debating obama. mitt is a white obama, hell bent on screwing us as always. if you dont vote you are in effect voting for obama. think about it and dont put YOU first. that is the problem these days!

 

[88GT]

This is the problem with a two party system. A third party will effectivly split the conservative vote. This is also why it is important to vote in the primary races. I think that the primaries need to be standardized like the national election, all on the same day.

It would be nice, but the primaries are state business, and the presidential election is federal business. Or rather, the primaries are national party business funneled through the state election laws process.

We'd be better off if we eliminated parties as a function of organized politics all together (or is it altogether? I never remember that one). I understand that birds of a feather will still flock together, but giving them control of the electoral process the way we have has undermined what integrity the system has. At the very least, I'd like to do away with the labels and force the electorate to evaluate a candidate based on his platform instead of his affiliation. But we're still stuck with the practical reality that like-minded folks will rally 'round the same flag pole.

It is a conundrum. But it's still better than the alternative anywhere else on God's earth.

Edit: forgot to answer the OP question. I don't know at this point who would get my vote. I could make an argument either way. Romney is on par with Obama in terms of spreading the wealth (except for his own, but I guess that still makes him like Obama); fiscally/monetarily, we'd be no better off under him, I'm afraid. And while I am enamored with Newt's intelligence and grasp of history and his meanness (let's face it, we have weanies for Republicans), I also think Newt is a lot like Hillary and wants the POTUS seat for his own selfish reasons. He's the closest we'd come to a monarchical dictator since the 1780s. Newt probably wouldn't spend us into oblivion on social programs, but he's not likely to curb any warmongering spending either. I'd probably go with Newt. He's likely to **** off Congress more than Romney and that would be better in terms of not getting anything passed. I also think he'd be more likely to use the veto. Not as much as he should, but more than Romney anyway.

 

[jbombelli]

I will not vote for either one of those ******* ********. Period. Ever. If either of them ends up on the ballot, I'll write my own name in.

I'd rather have 4 more years of Obama and a Republican Congress.

 

[Donnelly]

Isn't not voting or casting a vote for a third candidate, like a vote for Obama?

Perhaps, but I have decided that from now on I will only vote for those I actually support, and in good conscience I cannot support either Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney.

 

[tca1352]

I will not vote for either one of those ******* ********. Period. Ever. If either of them ends up on the ballot, I'll write my own name in.

I'd rather have 4 more years of Obama and a Republican Congress.

^^^^Bingo!!

Funny how the word "sheeple" is used towards liberals.....but somehow being told that I need to get behind whoever gets the GOP nod, no matter how much of an ***hat they are, is somehow...........different

 

[VERT]

Mitt or Newt = 4 more years of Obama. Why? Well this thread shows why.

 

[88GT]

I will not vote for either one of those ******* ********. Period. Ever. If either of them ends up on the ballot, I'll write my own name in.

I'd rather have 4 more years of Obama and a Republican Congress.

If Newt or Romney are on the ballot, I'm not sure we'll have a Republican majority in either house.

 

[jbombelli]

If Newt or Romney are on the ballot, I'm not sure we'll have a Republican majority in either house.

I'm not sure, either. But regardless, I won't vote for them.

Decades of voting for the lesser of two evils is what has brought our country to the precipice, and is what will push us over the edge. I will no longer help in the destruction of my country.

 

[army bratt]

seriously, it is vitally important for the next concervatine president to do 2 things . first he must abollish the healthcare mandate, which by the way, is law and currently being funded with defence money and secondly he must appoint a juris that is more inkeeping with our concervatine values. roe v wade must be overturned!

 

[mrjarrell]

Depending on who it is, I'll likely be voting for the Libertarian candidate. If it's Johnson, I won't even have to hold my nose over anything except his stance on the Fair Tax issue.

 

[mrjarrell]

seriously, it is vitally important for the next concervatine president to do 2 things . first he must abollish the healthcare mandate, which by the way, is law and currently being funded with defence money and secondly he must appoint a juris that is more inkeeping with our concervatine values. roe v wade must be overturned!

None of those are going to happen, regardless of who gets in, so you can just give that up.

 

[Destro]

::sigh:: looks like 4 more years

 

[ATM]

I would vote for Bacon.

 

[HICKMAN]

for those of you thinking it's noble to stay home and let Obama deal with a Republican Congress, let me remind you of something.

There is a potential for the next President to pick up to 3 or 4 members of the Supreme Court.

Should that slide to the far left, the country you call America will die...


and, once Obamacare gets up and running, much like Medicare and Social Security... it will never be undone.

 

[3whitey]

IF these two are left...and you stay home... you are voting 4 more for barry !!

 

[jbombelli]

IF these two are left...and you stay home... you are voting 4 more for barry !!

So which would you vote for, to run you over? A Peterbilt, a Kenworth, or a Freightliner?

 

[Donnelly]

for those of you thinking it's noble to stay home and let Obama deal with a Republican Congress, let me remind you of something.

There is a potential for the next President to pick up to 3 or 4 members of the Supreme Court.

Should that slide to the far left, the country you call America will die...

And I will be sad that it will die, but I will not fool myself into thinking that either of those two will slow our slide toward socialism.

 

[ATM]

So which would you vote for, to run you over? A Peterbilt, a Kenworth, or a Freightliner?

I would still vote for Bacon.



Actually, being run over by Bacon would be awesome.

 

[GLOCKMAN23C]

seriously, it is vitally important for the next concervatine president to do 2 things . first he must abollish the healthcare mandate, which by the way, is law and currently being funded with defence money and secondly he must appoint a juris that is more inkeeping with our concervatine values. roe v wade must be overturned!

I agree with army bratt, the unconstitutional healthcare mandate must be repealed. And appointing a juris will be two fold, we need to get someone that will make only constitutionalist nominations, and we need to get rid of people like Dick Lugar, who will vote for whomever the pres nominates. I do not see roe v wade being overturned, though.

 

[Destro]

And I will be sad that it will die, but I will not fool myself into thinking that either of those two will slow our slide toward socialism.

so your answer is to do nothing?