Politics Romney - Is he ready?

whether romney is personally "ready" or not---an idea that i find laughable myself, but then again i oppose everything he stands for politically---his campaign appears to be all kinds of messed up:

Inside the campaign: How Mitt Romney stumbled - Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei - POLITICO.com

 

As is becoming the norm, I am confused here. I fully support recognition of all legal rights for all couples in a committed long-term relationship but I recognize that there are people who have religious views that specify that marriage is between a man and a woman and that they may have a conflict to deal with on this question. Four months ago President Obama was one of these same people. The difference is President Obama was not called "anti-gay", why? This conflict is real and many with the conflict have no anti-gay sentiment and just as I did not call President Obama anti-gay, I would not call Romney anti-gay. My views on this subject evolved and I came to an understanding of the same-sex marriage point of view a couple of years ago, thanks to a person I know well who is now in a same sex marriage. We talked about the issues in a adult manner. Why do we name call and mock real people dealing with this real conflict?

I apply the same logic to the "life" of the unborn. There is a real moral conflict that does not directly infer an anti-woman agenda. It is a complicated issue. It is a complicated question - when does human life begin? To those who have an answer, please share! Until then I think most people are against late term pregnancy abortions when it is clear the baby can live outside of the womb.

 

Oh, yes. Because in the debate where a side tries to deny rights to an entire chunk of the population, calling someone "anti gay" is what really crosses a line.

 

Was the tone of my post consistent with the tone of the above?

In some cases a person could be indifferent or perhaps ignorant on a question - neither of which would infer an "anti" position. Many people who I talk to about marriage being between a man and a woman typically see that type of union as a special union in the eyes of God - a union designed to propagate the human race in a manner where children are protected. Their views often do not reflect any ounce of "anti" or hate. Do you hold the view that this conflict is simply a manufactured one to harm others? Serious question and I would appreciate an answer without sarcasm if possible.

 

it is really simple, ace.
if you oppose gay marriage, don't do one.
if you oppose abortion, don't have one.

 

Bullshit! I oppose murder. True, I will not murder anyone. But it is also true that I will not be a part of a society that will tolerate murder. I believe children, seniors and the disabled should be a protected classes in our society, that does not make me anti-everyone else! Try again.

 

there's no consensus on the far right understanding of abortion. there never will be. so the right doesn't get to control how abortion is understood. you can say whatever you want. you can say the sky is purple. you can say the earth is flat. it's no different.
personally, i couldn't care less what a religious conservative thinks abortion is.
the moral issue is solved by religious conservatives not having abortions.
see, unlike you, i accept that there are difference of ethical viewpoint on this question. and people are free to act as their ethics compel them to in a context where abortion is legal.

as for gay marriage, i am not someone you can debate with. i think all the grounds for discriminating against people based on who they choose to love are a joke.

 

Yes, if a person holds the view that there needs to be a federal amendment banning gay marriage, or that states should ban gay marriage, it is fair to characterize them as anti-gay. And no, calling someone "anti gay" is not on the same level of "hate" as actually campaigning to deny gay people rights. Regardless of the reason.

 

Any constitutional amendment to restrict rights is "anti" and this is the position of the Republican party on women's reproductive rights and gay marriage rights.

To make it worse, amendments such as these are not based on sound public policy, but an imposition of religious beliefs.

 

In other news Romney stepped on his own dick again-

And the right can't figure out why the millions and millions they're paying for ads isn't paying off. The guy is losing because he sucks as a candidate. The right, or many on the right, knew this during the primaries but nominated him anyway. In many early states I never saw the guy get above 25 maybe 30% of the vote. No one on the right thought this might be a problem?

Is he ready? Yeah I don't think he's ever going to be "ready."

 

That's funny that Romney, whose who campaign is based solely on different ways of framing himself as the victim, is decrying people who actually might be considered victims.

 

If that is his actual position, I agree the position is "anti" or hate based. I think the debate should be in regard to how the law recognizes committed relationships. Regardless of who is involved under the law it should be a civil union - with equal application to all relationships. I don't even care if a brother and sister enter into a civil union, three or more people, etc. (more or less a contract) to address specific relationship rights they want to make with each other. I am libertarian in this regard. What people do in a church with their spiritual leader should be between the people and their God however they define it.
--- merged: Sep 17, 2012 at 8:48 PM ---

Is the age restriction to run for President "anti" young?
--- merged: Sep 17, 2012 at 8:52 PM ---

He certainly was not my choice for the party nominee, actually he was at the bottom of my list. He reminds me of President Obama in many ways. Odds are I will vote third party in the general election. I just hope NC doesn't come down to one vote and it swings to President Obama, I would really feel bad about that. Romney is still the lesser of two evils. To those who think I am a Republican ideologue, I honestly would have happily voted for Hillery Clinton over Romney. I disagree with Clinton on many things, but I do respect her.

 

SECRET VIDEO: Romney Tells Millionaire Donors What He REALLY Thinks of Obama Voters | Mother Jones

the video of romney's fundraiser remarks.

you know, hearing this kind of bullshit from a bunch of yahoos in a bar is one thing. but coming from somone who at one point was considered a serious candidate for president of the united states is really not awesome. if this is the best the republicans should do, then they should follow their own market logic and put themselves out of business.

 

people here on this forum talk like the election is a forgone conclusion for another obama administration. does everyone really believe that? i mean the polls aren't that far off for what they are worth.

also, romney was talking to his supporters. i liken it to obama talking about right wingers clinging to 'guns and religion'. i mean both comments sound bad to a swing voter perhaps, but does it really matter? i mean he didnt lose any votes on this forum because there were no votes here for him that weren't already locked in.

 

Better/Worse/Same as President Obama condescendingly talking about those mean spirited folk who bitterly cling to their guns and religion? Pretty divisive wasn't it? Perhaps it is just a matter of view point.
--- merged: Sep 17, 2012 at 9:09 PM ---

It is going to be a simple matter of voter turnout. If high, President Obama wins. If low, Romney wins.