from a political perspective, I dont have a problem voting for a Mormon like Mitt.

this is why, when I look at the videos I have posted dealing with Mitt, Im just so fed up with him!

If it were up to me, Mitt would drop out now...

The fact that he is not a Christian?...well.....when i put that on top of the rest of this pile...it sure doesn't help his case....


The key will be if Mitt has a loss early and the conservatives gather around the other name....

Iowa is moot,
Iowa does not matter, as long as Mitt is close.

But over the following few contests we do find the make-or-break moment for Mitt.

Mitt has to win big in NH or the whole Party will turn on him like you wont believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

See Julie, the pro-abortion statements he has already made will mean that conservatives will NEVER in a million years support him.

It doesn't matter what he says now..

The fact that he might have claimed to have flipped on the issue is moot.

This means that Mitt has to wrap himself with a VP pick that no conservative will question.

The healthcare mandate statements, are also enough to drive conservatives like myself away...


This is why the conservatives want so much for anyone else to win...
Mitt is not a conservative and i want to vote for a conservative.

---

Hmmm, when I listened to the tape, it said that he would not change the M***. laws regarding abortion. He was also the governor when a more liberal abortion law came to his desk and he did not support it.

Did you watch the other video regarding Newt? Curious what you think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

The fact that he is not a Christian?...well.....when i put that on top of the rest of this pile...it sure doesn't help his case....


The key will be if Mitt has a loss early and the conservatives gather around the other name....

Iowa is moot,
Iowa does not matter, as long as Mitt is close.

But over the following few contests we do find the make-or-break moment for Mitt.

Mitt has to win big in NH or the whole Party will turn on him like you wont believe.

---

Did you watch the video on Newt? What do you think about his lobbying and making so much money off of Freddie and Fannie? Or that he also supports mandates and global warming? I think the "christians" are putting up another John McCain---long term politician with little business experience.

actually Christian conservatives like myself were totally against Mccain.

and he never once tried to seek my vote.

and he lost.

That's the lessen to be learned here.

Christian conservatives are the heart of the Party, and if you want to win the general election, you better pack your team with people that speak to my issues with the words I use.

McCain had stabbed in the back every cause I believe in.
Mitt also has stabbed in the back every cause I believe in.

The thing Mitt has to do if he wins the Primary is pick a real winner for a VP....and also drop a few names of strong Christian conservatives as the people he will bring to Washington with him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

actually Christian conservatives like myself were totally against Mccain.

and he never once tried to seek my vote.

and he lost.

That's the lessen to be learned here.

Christian conservatives are the heart of the Party, and if you want to win the general election, you better pack your team with people that speak to my issues with the words I use.

McCain had stabbed in the back every cause I believe in.
Mitt also has stabbed in the back every cause I believe in.

The thing Mitt has to do if he wins the Primary is pick a real winner for a VP....and also drop a few names of strong Christian conservatives as the people he will bring to Washington with him.

---

Alan, how do you feel about Newt and the video I gave you?

newt is a conservative, thats what you know for sure about newt.

newt never fakes being this or that just to get elected...
Even in the few places where Newt and i disagree, i can tell that his views are part of who he is at his core.....

Newt has a strong inner core that drives him
I like Newt....I think he is interesting, and can tell a good joke.

If it came down to a vote between Mitt and Newt, I would vote for newt ...Newt just seems more "real " to me.....


Now as for what do i think of newt?....
I think he cant control himself.

His mouth gets him into a lot of trouble.

While he has the support of the Christian conservatives like myself , he also has an odd way of shooting from the hip, and go off into things that are better left not done.


While I enjoy the fact that we finally have a real conservative leading the pack and that even mitt is in 2nd or 3rd place to Newt right now....I also understand that with Newt there is always the chance that he is just one off-the-wall remark from being totally out of this race...

So Im happy he is still in the hunt, but Im not real sure he will last ling...

Julie, the real fun part of this topic over all the other ones, is that this one actually has an ending.

This one will come to a final moment when the voting starts and the talking stops.

We will know one way or the other how this will play out....


I have give my predictions, and I will do so right up to the moment people are starting to vote in Iowa, (or whatsver they do there?)

My predictions:
I know being that Mitt is a mormon and you are two, that it's only natural that you want to support your team in the big game.

Be that as it may, in time the novelty of having a guy with your faith or your skin color in the White House wears off very fast...

So lets just see how this election might stack up for Mitt?

The first place to make news in this election will be Iowa, (Jan 3rd)
Mitt can lose Iowa with no real damage to his chances.

What we have learned in the past is, "As Iowa goes, so goes....Iowa"

So as long as Mitt is a respectable 2nd or 3rd, there is no issue not winning.

The real test of Mitt is on Jan 10 in New Hampshire.
This is the place where Mitt can bury the rest of the pack, or really screw up and be in for a nasty fight over the next few weeks.

The best thing that Mitt can have happen is that he wins big in New Hampshire. If Mitt wins, and wins big, most of the pack will have packed it in as they would not have the money to hang on untll January 21, atSouth Carolina.

South Carolina is always the ideal spot for a Christian to break out of the pack....This would have been the state for cain to rise to the top. But if cain os all but finished right now, this means that South Carolina will be the big religious test for Mitt.

If Mitt does well by South Carolina, then that means that the Christians are swinging in behind him, and he is all set.

However if Mitt cant win Sough Carolina, ...or worse, if Mitt drops to 3rd or lower there it means that he better start looking at "Christians Only" when he thinks about a VP,

Florida is on Jan 31, and it will be all over by then one way or the other...

So the best thing for Mitt is to place 2nd in Iowa, and then win in New Hampshire.


Whats the worst news for Mitt?
What would be the sign for you to look for that Mitt has totally failed?

Look for Mitt to come in 3rd in Iowa, and then 2nd in New Hampshire.
That would lead to a 3rd or 4th pl;ace finish in South Carolina.
and that brings us to Florida where Mitt would have to drop out if he could not bring home a victory.
But...we shall see....

[QUOTE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Julie, the real fun part of this topic over all the other ones, is that this one actually has an ending.

This one will come to a final moment when the voting starts and the talking stops.

We will know one way or the other how this will play out....


I have give my predictions, and I will do so right up to the moment people are starting to vote in Iowa, (or whatsver they do there?)

---

Yes, we shall see the outcome here.

Quote:

---

My predictions:
I know being that Mitt is a mormon and you are two, that it's only natural that you want to support your team in the big game.

Be that as it may, in time the novelty of having a guy with your faith or your skin color in the White House wears off very fast...

---

Actually, Mitt being a Mormon is not what drives me to like him. John Huntsman is a Mormon too, remember and so is Harry Reid. And as many of my friends are Mormon--both strong Republicans and Democrats---they range all over the place as well as who they like. That said, I like Mitt because I am more of a moderate who likes and studied economics and so when Mitt talks, he makes sense to me. I still think one of his big draw backs is that he talks over people's heads. Ron Paul made this same mistake when he discussed "M1" in the debates as most people don't know what that is.


What I don't like about Newt is that from paying attention, I think we might be getting another George W. Bush--too much cowboy (you call it badger). Whatever it is---it appears to me as not enough smarts in the mouth department.

Quote:

---

South Carolina is always the ideal spot for a Christian to break out of the pack....This would have been the state for cain to rise to the top. But if cain os all but finished right now, this means that South Carolina will be the big religious test for Mitt.

---

It is sad to me that people like WM have sensationalized my religion so much that people would be afraid to vote for Mitt based on his religion. Personally, it comes across to me as just plain bigoted.

Quote:

---

So the best thing for Mitt is to place 2nd in Iowa, and then win in New
Look for Mitt to come in 3rd in Iowa, and then 2nd in New Hampshire.
That would lead to a 3rd or 4th pl;ace finish in South Carolina.
and that brings us to Florida where Mitt would have to drop out if he could not bring home a victory.
But...we shall see....

---

And here I thought that you thought Mitt had it totally locked up.

Here is one article I read on the subject:

Quote:

---

"Newt can't take the scrutiny," agreed a Democrat, "and he has the personality of an angry badger."

Some Insiders argued that a Gingrich nomination would be a gift to the Obama campaign.

"Shhhhhhhhh - don't tell them!" begged a Democrat, tongue firmly in cheek. "They seem hell-bent on finding anybody but Mitt. Grandpa Newt and all his quirks and quacks would be just fine, thank you."

"Bigfoot dressed as a circus clown would have a better chance of beating President Obama than Newt Gingrich, a similarly farcical character," quipped a Republican.

"Come on," sighed another GOP Insider, "the White House is probably giving money to Gingrich as we speak."

http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal...ers-not-so.php

---

When I think that the "christian right" might not vote for Mitt because of religion and put in Newt, I sit back and think, here we go again...another John McCain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

And here I thought that you thought Mitt had it totally locked up.

.

---

Yes, I was giving you a list of the "Good News" and the "Bad News" for Mitt...

The good news would be in Mitt comes in a close 2nd in Iowa, and then kicks **** in NH and by the time Florida happens Mitt has it all wrapped up.

the bad news is if Mitt is far back in Iowa, and this hurts him in NH where he comes in 2nd....if that happens, then by the time Mitt gets to Florida he may be already out of the race.


So yes, i do think based on the history of the Republican party, that Mitt has it already won and will be the person who will lead the ticket.
But, this is all in the future and I dont know the future...so it's unknown to me as well.

I believe Mitt has it won, but there is always a chance Mitt might screw it up yet...

as for the idea that many Dems want Newt to beat Mitt?

They might....

I remember many leading liberals were very happy to see Ronald Reagan lead the ticket against Jimmy Carter, as they felt no one would vote for an actor....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

as for the idea that many Dems want Newt to beat Mitt?

They might....

I remember many leading liberals were very happy to see Ronald Reagan lead the ticket against Jimmy Carter, as they felt no one would vote for an actor....

---

And Reagan was one of the "flip-floppers" who was once a Democrat! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

who was once a Democrat! ;)

---

yes...but I believe it was the dems who changed.

You have to remember that at the time the dems were seen as the more Pro-military....the whole Kennedy staring down the USSR and stuff.

Then step by step the liberals took over the party.
The Dems lost the South for a whole there remember?

The Dems used to be a conservative party...but over this generation the Liberals have gotten rid of all the conservatives.

Try to be pro-Life and a D
em that speaks out now.....and you get hammered down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

yes...but I believe it was the dems who changed.

You have to remember that at the time the dems were seen as the more Pro-military....the whole Kennedy staring down the USSR and stuff.

Then step by step the liberals took over the party.
The Dems lost the South for a whole there remember?

The Dems used to be a conservative party...but over this generation the Liberals have gotten rid of all the conservatives.

Try to be pro-Life and a D
em that speaks out now.....and you get hammered down.

---

On Reagan:

Quote:

---

Allowed abortion as CA Gov.; didn’t push pro-life as Pres.
Reagan was not as obsessive about anti-abortion legislation as he often seemed. Early in his California governorship he had signed a permissive abortion bill that has resulted in more than a million abortions. Afterward, he inaccurately blamed this outcome on doctors, saying that they had deliberately misinterpreted the law. When Reagan ran for president, he won backing from pro-life forces by advocating a cons***utional amendment that would have prohibited all abortions except when necessary to save the life of the mother. Reagan’s stand was partly a product of political calculation, as was his tactic after he was elected of addressing the annual pro-life rally held in Washington by telephone so that he would not be seen with the leaders of the movement on the evening news. While I do not doubt Reagan’s sincerity in advocating an anti-abortion amendment, he invested few political resources toward obtaining this goal.
Source: The Role of a Lifetime, by Lou Cannon, p. 812 Jul 2, 1991

---

It looks as if Newt is leading Iowa. I do predict that if he wins, Obama will have another four years as Newt has sooo much baggage, all of it will come out in the next year. And Newt has a propensity to say very s.tupid things---I don't think he can keep a lid on it for the 11 months necessary to win the election. *sigh*

Iowa I think is on Jan 3rd.....

Mitt can lose Iowa....he only has to be close.

So the headlines that say "Newt leads in Iowa" are actually rather meaningless.

But Mitt really needs to do well in NH because for the next few weeks after that ,( if he has lost both Iowa and NH )Mitt can have a lot of bad news given the next states to vote.

The rise of Newt is because many see him as the last conservative name left at the table.

But I agree, Newt has to keep his mouth shut for another 30 days in a row?......thats going to be tricky for him.

newt left office because he was running around with women, cheating on his wife, and over the years has been doing this same thing off-and-on .

In this year of Cain's clearly cheating and the general feeling of 'fed up" by the Republican voter, with that kinda of behavior by the guys in the race, I dont think Newt would be the first name i would suggest to lead the ticket.

Just think....in less than a month we will have our final "Iowa" answer....

Thank GOD!

Reagan never flipped his position of abortion during his life.
But he did support a bill that used the term "Therapeutic" and when questioned at the time, said this was for 'self defence" to save the life of the mother.

The term both the law and Reagan used was "Therapeutic" and it was a medical term, and was to point us to the understanding that if it was needed, that a doctor had the duty to protect the life of the mother, and that this bill would back-up the doctor's decision.

However it soon became clear that (Just like with medical pot today) that more and more doctors just were using a law to do whatever they wanted to make money.

it's just like the medical pot laws there now.
On paper it reads that every once in a while you "might" see a person with a note that allows him a little pot during cancer treatments...
But thats is NOT how the law has worked out.

My guess is that many Cal Republicans also voted to support the Medical pot laws, only to now find that it blew up in their faces....

It does not mean that the Republicans have flipped their views on pot...

But the term "medical pot" like the term "Therapeutic abortion" can mean things that other people would not make it mean....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

But I agree, Newt has to keep his mouth shut for another 30 days in a row?......thats going to be tricky for him.

newt left office because he was running around with women, cheating on his wife, and over the years has been doing this same thing off-and-on .

In this year of Cain's clearly cheating and the general feeling of 'fed up" by the Republican voter, with that kinda of behavior by the guys in the race, I dont think Newt would be the first name i would suggest to lead the ticket.

---

You think he needs to keep his mouth shut for only "30 days"---you are forgetting that this is the "conservative hope" that will need to keep his mouth shut for the 11 months. Good luck with that! If New is the conservative aka "not Mormon" candidate---heaven help us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Just think....in less than a month we will have our final "Iowa" answer....

Thank GOD!

---

Or, if Newt wins it---I don't think God has had much to do with it as I think Obama will be able to slaughter him in the coming year. There is too much footage of Newt being an i.diot to overcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Reagan never flipped his position of abortion during his life.
But he did support a bill that used the term "Therapeutic" and when questioned at the time, said this was for 'self defence" to save the life of the mother.

The term both the law and Reagan used was "Therapeutic" and it was a medical term, and was to point us to the understanding that if it was needed, that a doctor had the duty to protect the life of the mother, and that this bill would back-up the doctor's decision.

However it soon became clear that (Just like with medical pot today) that more and more doctors just were using a law to do whatever they wanted to make money.

it's just like the medical pot laws there now.
On paper it reads that every once in a while you "might" see a person with a note that allows him a little pot during cancer treatments...
But thats is NOT how the law has worked out.

My guess is that many Cal Republicans also voted to support the Medical pot laws, only to now find that it blew up in their faces....

It does not mean that the Republicans have flipped their views on pot...

But the term "medical pot" like the term "Therapeutic abortion" can mean things that other people would not make it mean....

---

And if you read Mitt's stance, he also said he "flipped" or "flopped" because of the abuses he saw of the laws.

Quote:

---

“One of these days we’ll have a conversation about Newt Gingrich,” Pelosi told Talking Points Memo. “When the time is right. … I know a lot about him. I served on the investigative committee that investigated him, four of us locked in a room in an undisclosed location for a year. A thousand pages of his stuff.”

Gingrich, who served as Speaker of the House, worked with Pelosi in Congress from 1987 to 1999. Pelosi also served on the ethics committee that investigated Gingrich for tax cheating and campaign finance violations in the late ’90s.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...-time-is-right

---

It is only beginning. If "evangelicals" insist on this 'true conservative' for their candidate---I predict that he will not make it through the election.

Newt's response to The Hill blog (also found on the The Hill) said he thanks Nancy for the "early Christmas Present" as in that if she discloses what went on in that investigation, she will violate the rules of the committee. The report then goes on to say:

Quote:

---

Pelosi served on the ethics committee that sanctioned Gingrich for violating tax law and lying to an investigative panel when he claimed tax-exempt status for a college course he ran for political purposes. Gingrich agreed to a $300,000 fine and admitted that he submitted inaccurate statements to the committee, but maintained Monday that the majority of the charges "were repudiated as false."

---

Okay---this is the "true conservative" that evangelicals want??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

And if you read Mitt's stance, he also said he "flipped" or "flopped" because of the abuses he saw of the laws.

---

See thats the thing..I dont believe this "story" he came up with to make his flip look better.

I believe it is a political lie....a falsehood told for political gain...
and this points me back the the lack of "core" that i and a lot of Republicans see in Mitt.

There just does not seem to be a real core to the man...nothing underneath that drives him and his views.

The truth is, all I see in him is....a "product"
Mitt as a person is just all product.

[QUOTE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

See thats the thing..I dont believe this "story" he came up with to make his flip look better.

---

Then why do you believe Reagan's?

Quote:

---

I believe it is a political lie....a falsehood told for political gain...
and this points me back the the lack of "core" that i and a lot of Republicans see in Mitt.

---

This is interesting because as governor of M***. when a law came before him, he voted pro-life.

Quote:

---

There just does not seem to be a real core to the man...nothing underneath that drives him and his views.

The truth is, all I see in him is....a "product"
Mitt as a person is just all product.

---

And you think Newt is a man of integrity???

[QUOTE=BigJulie;105740]

Quote:

---

And you think Newt is a man of integrity???

---

I believe Newt, for all his personal flaws, is actually a conservative at his core.

I believe that Newt's core views drive him into politics in the first place.
When Newt takes a political stand on an issue, its based on his core views of right and wrong...good and bad...


With Mitt on the other hand, I get the feeling that a guy just off stage had whispered to him what point of view to have depending on the audience he was standing in front of.

Oh, and Julie,

I noticed that the topic that had your name in it (and against the forum rules) has turned up missing?

I tried to warn people....LOL

I tried to tell them that they are breaking the rules, and that when their topic gets removed its going to be seen by us as them being bent over a knee and publicly spanked.

But some kids have to learn the hard way i guess.

Oh, and did you notice how when i pointed out that it's against the rules to aim by name a topic at another member I was accused of being a Mormon sympathizer?

Thats the way some people are...they cant permit anyone to even slightly disagree with them....so when i stood up against what i saw was wrong, it was immediately branded "Satanic" in their minds....

Some people!>>>I just dont get.

I really do feel ashamed for the way some people of my faith went on and on with their false accusations.

It never seems to come to some people, that they dont make their faith look better to the Lost, by breaking the rules and thinking they can get away with it because "they are Christian, and the other person is not"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Oh, and Julie,

I noticed that the topic that had your name in it (and against the forum rules) has turned up missing?

I tried to warn people....LOL

I tried to tell them that they are breaking the rules, and that when their topic gets removed its going to be seen by us as them being bent over a knee and publicly spanked.

But some kids have to learn the hard way i guess.

Oh, and did you notice how when i pointed out that it's against the rules to aim by name a topic at another member I was accused of being a Mormon sympathizer?

Thats the way some people are...they cant permit anyone to even slightly disagree with them....so when i stood up against what i saw was wrong, it was immediately branded "Satanic" in their minds....

Some people!>>>I just dont get.

I really do feel ashamed for the way some people of my faith went on and on with their false accusations.

It never seems to come to some people, that they dont make their faith look better to the Lost, by breaking the rules and thinking they can get away with it because "they are Christian, and the other person is not"

---

I appreciated you standing up for me. I also appreciate the fact that criticism against the Mormon faith is felt so strongly that anyone who tries to defend us is seen as "satanic." *sigh*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

I believe Newt, for all his personal flaws, is actually a conservative at his core.

I believe that Newt's core views drive him into politics in the first place.
When Newt takes a political stand on an issue, its based on his core views of right and wrong...good and bad...


With Mitt on the other hand, I get the feeling that a guy just off stage had whispered to him what point of view to have depending on the audience he was standing in front of.

---

You need to read up more on Newt---he is actually far more of a RINO than Mitt Romney. I am sure this will be coming out---if not before the primaries--if he wins, then after the primaries. And I am sure it will also come out all of his lobbying and big money that he made (NPR reported yesterday that it was 55 million) for green energy lobbying efforts. He also made a boat load off of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This is what people are disgusted with and he will not win. I wish so badly you could look at Mitt without tainted eyes and look at his voting record instead of the talking points.

All I can see is someone who is smart enough to solve problems economically. You see an empty suit. I see a brain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

I appreciated you standing up for me. I also appreciate the fact that criticism against the Mormon faith is felt so strongly that anyone who tries to defend us is seen as "satanic." *sigh*

---

the ones who were against me got spanked...

But I doubt they learned their lesson...

I bet they are watching for the next time I stick my neck out and try to defend the right thing to do ....

but I dont care all that much,

, I was right, and proved right in the end,
they were always wrong and now are proven wrong for all to see.

Alan--can I honestly say that if evangelicals are so close-minded to a Mormon being president that they would rather vote for someone who believes in mandates, has believed in global warming, has numerous ethics violations, has received a ton of lobbying money and has been investigated and fined for his violations regarding his lobbying, has cheated on not one, but two wives, and believes in child labor, etc...well, I don't know if I can ever vote along with the "evangelical right-wingers" again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Alan--can I honestly say that if evangelicals are so close-minded to a Mormon being president .....

---

While the "Mormon thing" is big news right now, trust me, it will fade into the background if Mitt plays his cards in the correct manner and allows the issue to fade.

About the only thing that can really bring that up again is if there are any video recordings of Mitt as a younger guy going door to door, or if there are any recordings of Mitt saying or doing something in connection to the Mormon religion, or with the Mormon temple ceremonies that get out.

If that happens this close to Iowa, Mitt would be finished...


The deal with Newt is that he is not now, nor has he ever been the conservative top choice for the ticket.

What Newt is?.....he is the last guy standing that is even slightly a conservative.

Mitt is liberal,,,thats just a fact.
The chick in the race does not seem on top of her game.
Perry and Paul keep shooting themselves in the foot.
Cain is history.

The others in the pack just never caught on and have run out of steam.

That leaves right now only Newt to carry the banner "Anyone But Mitt" that the conservatives will support....even if they have to hold their nose when they get close to Newt.

I think we are less that 600 hours until Iowa is over.....so we shall see how things pan out in the end.

I do know that by the time North Dakota gets to vote it will be all over by then.

[QUOTE=alanmolstad;106390]

Quote:

---

The deal with Newt is that he is not now, nor has he ever been the conservative top choice for the ticket.

What Newt is?.....he is the last guy standing that is even slightly a conservative.

---

If you say that, then you haven't paid attention to his voting record, nor his record for ethical violations. Or in your mind, does conservative equate with someone who makes a boat-load of money in ethics violations for lobbying?

Quote:

---

Mitt is liberal,,,thats just a fact.

---

He is a moderate--I will give you that, but he is a financial conversative in regards to letting businesses work.

Quote:

---

The chick in the race does not seem on top of her game.

---

You must like provoking me with this sexist comments.

Quote:

---

That leaves right now only Newt to carry the banner "Anyone But Mitt" that the conservatives will support....even if they have to hold their nose when they get close to Newt.

---

Yes, but when you compare their stated beliefs---Mitt and Newt are not that dissimilar other than one has character and one doesn't. And that is when I go---wow, this party is made up more of bigots than anything else and I have to question if I really want to endorse that.

[QUOTE=BigJulie;106431]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

If you say that, then you haven't paid attention to his voting record,

.

---

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...ve-credential/

The voting record is very clearly conservative.
In fact, under Newt the whole congress turned the tide in the 90s and it was in no small way all because of Newts leadership...

So from a Conservative point of view, I will have no trouble at all supporting Newt over Obama should Newt win the ticket.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Or in your mind, does conservative equate with someone who makes a boat-load of money in ethics violations for lobbying?

.

---

Newt does seem to have some trouble filling out foarms, but all his problems seem to be more with House rules than anything else, so i cut a guy slack for that stuff.

My view of conservatism is that all men can work hard at their ***s, and can expect to try to earn as much as they can...

Its about freedoms to both seceded and fail.

So I got no issues at all with any money Newt has earned in and out of Washington.
If Newt got a *** talking or handing out advice, then that would be what I expected given that seems to be what he does best.

The only concern I have is if Mitt starts to act like a guy in 2nd place, and hitting the TV talk shows and sending out his supporters to cause harm to other conservatives.

There is something to be said for not opening himself up too much.

I think that there is still time for Mitt to **** his chances if he starts to act like a guy who thinks he is going to lose.

If he starts to attack other in the race, the media will be more than happy to go after him.
The "Mormon thing" right now is a sleeping dragon that seems for the most part to be off the radar screens of Conservative voters.

But if Mitt starts to get desperate, and do things that remind people a little too much that he is "Not like us"
Then, Im sure the Mormon question will awake up in the minds of many Christian conservatives,and that will end Mitt chances.

The weird thing is, that while there is a chance that the "Mormon thing" might doom Mitt's chances if he starts to act desperate and do things that push that issue forward in the minds of the voters, that this might actually help other Mormons in the race and in the future....it would sorta get us all "over the hump" of voting for non-Christian people for president.

So while Mitt is clearly in the lead and has a lot of support from Party Leadership, there is still the unknown future to deal with, and at this point everyone is only one slip-up from being tossed out of the race, or tossed into the lead...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

But if Mitt starts to get desperate, and do things that remind people a little too much that he is "Not like us"

---

In the above Im thinking of the last debate, where he reached out his hand to make a public $10,000 bet over some wording in a reprinted book.

To me, this strikes me as just the type of stuff a guy who is just not very confident in his chances anymore would do.
It also seems to just be in very bad taste to do on National TV....

It will turn up in ad after ad should Mitt go up against Obama.

The response is too easy for every American to fill in in their minds "I dont make that kind of money Mitt"
and suddenly everyone in the country is looking at Mitt like he is "One of them, not one of us"

And to be elected you have to appear as "one of us"

The debate error was not enough to doom him.
But it does show that there are some cracks in the armor...there are some situations where even if I believe Mitt has it locked up , that he could do or say things that totally screw up his chances.....

Well, Alan---you can keep touting Newt. Here are a few comments posted on the web:

Quote:

---

His favorite president is big government Teddy Roosevelt. He praises huge "national greatness" federal spending boondoggles (rail, c****s, NASA). He's championed goofball techno-mystics and called for a world governing body to help people deal with all the confusing technology that surrounds us. He lobbied for FANNIE (despite his lies). He's an enviro-nut***. He supports expanding medicare. He's a protectionist who supports huge ethanol subsidies. He's an imperialist who giggles at the thought of launching new wars. If that's what it means to be "clearly conservative", then Obama is George Washington. (Edward Cox)

---

Quote:

---

Newt is intelligent, but he is a 'liberal' who supported a single payer mandate, climate change legislation (along with 400 other co sponsored bills with Pelosi), the forming of the uncons***utional department of education, the irresponsible loans from Freddie and Fannie (in fact, while Ron Paul warned of the danger caused by these loans, Newt attacked him). Newt has been a friend to lobbyists and special interests (even bragged about it). His spending and domestic policy match Obama's quite nicely. What is Newts plan to cut spending? He doesn't have one! (Scott Larson)

---

Quote:

---

Moreover, Gingrich's main rival is Mitt Romney, of the Mormon faith. In 2008, Huckabee successfully played on the negative feelings held by many evangelicals toward the Church of Latter Day Saints. And resistance to Romney's faith is still greater than anyone admits. (Washington Post)

---

Quote:

---

I'm hoping that the Republican electorate does not come out of its Newt coma until he is the nominee...*he's the holy grail of candidates for Democrats.*..(Huffington Post)

---

Quote:

---

So, the hunt for the Anti-Romney continues, and it is now sniffing Newt... the contracadictory, didactic, ethically "poorly boundaried*' lifelong pol with a capacity for rhetoric and ideas, and a capacity for antagonizing those who stand too close. Wonder how long he will last before his past catches up to him? Long enough to squash his campaign? (Huffington Post)

---

All I know is that if I have a choice between the union thug (Obama) who has cost the taxpayers millions of dollars to protect his union buddies or this lobbying crook (Newt) who has not only cost taxpayers millions of dollars but many ***s as well--

Well--truth is, I will sit this election out. If this country is going to be destroyed further, it will not be at my hands. And I am one of those swing voters who see problems with both sides. But I honestly can't say that Newt would be better than Obama; in fact, I think he may be just as dangerous. So, if the abortion issue, and not the "political crook" issue is how the GOP is going to decide their candidate---I'm out.

I support NASA....

thats one of the main places that troubles me with Mitt.

Newt supports NASA and has spoken out about the dreams he has for NASa in the future.

Nad Mitt?

,nothing.... and Mitt has no vision at all for the future of NASA....

and the abortion issue will work to be one of the main reasons conservatives vote in the first place.

I have a feeling that by next year the economy will be seen as on the mend, so that issue will be more or less off the table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

I support NASA....

thats one of the main places that troubles me with Mitt.

Newt supports NASA and has spoken out about the dreams he has for NASa in the future.

Nad Mitt?

,nothing.... and Mitt has no vision at all for the future of NASA....

---

NASA??? That is how you are going to decide? And for the sake of NASA, you can ignore the ethics violations and loads of money that Newt received from Freddie and Fannie, etc. Okay???