Posted on 12/29/2007 11:17:17 PM PST by ellery
We’ll see what Iowa and New Hampshire bring, vote-wise.
One thing that has to be kept in mind about these statistics - One would surmise that most of Hillary’s 47% core opposition are not Democrats and most of Romney’s 47% are not Republicans. Presumably one would not see these kind of negatives expressed at the ballot box during the primaries.
Just to make it clear, I’m not a Romney supporter in the primaries, but in the general election I’d be hard pressed to vote for a Democrat just to deny my vote to Romney. I’d probably vote for him, but I’d have to hold my nose to do so.
“Just to make it clear, I’m not a Romney supporter in the primaries, but in the general election I’d be hard pressed to vote for a Democrat just to deny my vote to Romney. I’d probably vote for him, but I’d have to hold my nose to do so.”
Good, glad to hear it. I would vote for either Romney or Thompson as our candidate, and I wouldn’t have to hold my nose for either of them. Both are good men.
Romney may well be a good man, it’s not for me to be the judge of that. My concerns with Romney have to do with other aspects of the man than his goodness. I just don’t see leadship there - management and administration, yes, but not leadership. I see Romney as a real good Postmaster General.
“I just don’t see leadship there - management and administration, yes, but not leadership. I see Romney as a real good Postmaster General.”
Then you don’t seem to know much about him. He started a business from scratch, was the CEO of it, and turned it into a billion dollar business. He took over the leadership of the Olympics, which were in the red, and put it into the black, financially. Those are leadership positions, not just management. He was the top dog and responsible for the decision making in both of them. He also was the leader in Massachusetts, as that’s what a Governor is, a leader of his state. Of course, he obviously therefore has great management and administrative capabilites, he is an organizer. That is a good thing, not a negative one. I think you need to reconsider your statement above.
No, all the things you mention are management. I’m a manager myslef, and I know the difference between management and leadership.
I don’t deny that Romney has mastered some elements of leadership, as much as a manager would need, but he doesn’t have it in the measure that a President needs, and he sure didn’t have it in the measure a Governor would need, either.
Unless you want to call his initiative in facilitating “Gay Marriage” in Massachussetts, in excess of and in advance of ANY court demand, leadership, then that is the kind of leadership I don’t want.
“Unless you want to call his initiative in facilitating “Gay Marriage” in Massachussetts, in excess of and in advance of ANY court demand, leadership, then that is the kind of leadership I don’t want.”
Oh, so you measure “leadership” only if on your social issues? There are other issues out there and that’s where I and the Johnny-One-Notes part ways. I want economic leadership, tough on terrorism leadership, military strength leadership, and also social leadership. Romney is not one dimensional in his leadership capabilities, but it appears you are one dimensional in your definition of it.
Come on.
I provided one example of something Romney did as Governor of Massachussetts. By no means is that my only issue - or even the most important one to me.
You say “I want economic leadership, tough on terrorism leadership, military strength leadership, and also social leadership.” Can you offer me any examples of where Mitt Romney has provided leadership on a terrorism related issue, a military strength issue, or an economic issue of substance?
Fred is our guy. No doubt about it.
Sincere. Straightforward. Secure. A grounded, common-sense conservative.That's the way I see Fred. Other than Hunter (who unfortunately is going nowhere) there are no other conservatives in this race.
Exactly. I think it's ironic, but the one guy in the race who is an actor ends up being the guy with the most substance and charactre, bar none.
What a pleasure, everything he says is as he believes, straight from the heart and meaning every word of it.
He doesn’t have to remember what he said yesterday because its the same thing he is going to say today.
The rest of the field is scripted and they don’t remember what they said yesterday or last week and they believe the people won’t remember either so when they say a different thing today they think its ok.
I said it before and I’ll say it again, FRED is doing fine and I believe he will do better right up to the end and be the next president of this great USA regardless of what the establishment thinks or trys to deter.
“but not a good President. We need a President who can present a clear, consistent message and stick with it. So far, all I’ve seen from Mitt is flip-flop and positions of convenience.”
Oh, I see, you’d rather not have a doer like Romney is and has been all of his life, and rather have a blatherer from the Senate where mostly it’s all talk no show, or perhaps a former Baptist minister for President. Or the mayor of a city. Or McCain when you know he sponsors bills that are consistently against his alleged conservative bases’ beliefs (immigration, CFR, etc.). And by the way, Mitt flipped, but did not flop back. Only flipped on a few issues, like abortion, just as Reagan did. In fact Reagan flipped from being a Dem to being a Pub. I’m sure you would have wanted him to stay a Dem, right? Perhaps you would have rather Romney stayed pro-choice rather than flipping to being anti-abortion like so many people I know have done. I say welcome them with open arms for having gone over to the right side.
Very well done Maelstorm, you covered it about all and I believe most will see it the same way in time to make Fred our next president.
Thompson needs to ask the question:
Who can you trust?
I will exempt Fred from that category because he arrived at a late date and he is a man apart. He has stood up for the United states when others like Huckabee couldn’t wait to apologize. (just more pandering :) He has called Michael Moore to the mat when others were calling his ilk patriots. He stood up to a media and to the insanity of global warming by not raising his hand to masses to celebrate group ignorance. (really honest, no pandering :) Mitt raised his hand, Rudy raised his hand, and Huckabee raised his hand to salute the religion of Albert Gore. Do you think they will not disappoint us as they sniff after the media once elected? Aren’t you sick of the mealy mouthed bureaucrat speak that these guys specialize in?
.....Excellent post/points. :)
“No fluff. No pandering. No saying what he THINKS people might want to hear.
Sincere. Straightforward. Secure. A grounded, common-sense conservative.
I just hope Iowans wake up before Thursday. As a recovering Iowan myself, I beg you Hawkeye Republicans: Wake up!
Fred is the best choice for the nation, hands down!”
I believe you will find that very many Iowa conservatives are going to join you in supporting Fred when they see and hear the truth about the other candidates. They will know that Fred is the REAL CONSERVATIVE! GO FRED!
His numbers with independents are (in the last data I've seen, at least) horrendous. They like 'straight shooters' like McCain, not flip-floppers who represent everything bad about politicians. That is Mitt's biggest electoral weakness. His secondary weakness is his problem with conservative Republicans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.