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

[BigJulie]

I thought you might be interested in this from CNN's fact checker:

Mitt Romney defends his record on abortion

The statement: "What came to my desk was a piece of legislation that said, 'We're going to redefine when life begins.' In our state, we said life began at conception. The Legislature wanted to change that to say, 'no, we're going to do that at implantation.' I vetoed that. The Legislature also said, 'We want to allow cloning for purposes of creating new embryos of testing.' I vetoed that. They didn't want abstinence education; I pursued abstinence education. There was an effort to have a morning-after pill provided to young women in their teens; I vetoed that. I stood as a pro-life governor."

The facts: Romney ran two statewide campaigns in M***achusetts - an unsuccessful bid for Senate in 1994 and a winning one for governor in 2002 - as a supporter of abortion rights. But in 2005, he vetoed an emergency contraception bill and declared in the pages of the Boston Globe that he was an opponent of abortion, though he "respected the state's democratically held view" in favor of abortion rights.

Romney went on to veto the other bills he mentioned as well, though state lawmakers overrode his veto of a bill that would have allowed the creation of embryos for stem-cell research.
In April 2006, he announced $800,000 in grants for abstinence education programs, which are supported by many religious conservatives as an alternative to sex education.

The verdict: True. Romney's opposition to abortion is still viewed suspiciously by many conservatives, but his record supports the claims he made Thursday night.
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/20...ate/?hpt=hp_t1

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

he sheepishly smiled and said "I don't know." .

I never watched the debate so i will have to look that one up.

But just looking at it as you have presented it here , I got to say that is the most weird thing he could have said.

Im not really sure what the deal is with him and his tax returns?
Why not have them ready to go when you head to Iowa at the start?
Whats the big deal?
We all have tax returns right?

6 months before Iowa you announce you are running for President on a Monday....get all the free press and media hype all week long, and then just as the news guys are going home on Friday night you send out your tax return statement....By Monday morning when everyone goes back to work it's "old news' and a non-issue.

If you are running for President you got to be able to lay your financial cards on the table...

The "I dont know" quote makes it seem like he was hiding something...like there is something in the tax returns that he has hidden from his wife or something?...


Or was his math bad back in 2010 and he got a bigger return that he should have?..

Or will we find out that his real name is "Mitt The Dude, Romney" ?

Putting out their tax return is one of the basic things the people running for President have to do.
It's expected.

The "I dont know" answer does point back to Mitt's staff as you say, and it does show that 'something is very wrong there"...if all the better answer he had for the "Tax return issue" is an answer you expect from a juvenile.

To me it's like Mitt's staff had him so well ready to give the next campaign speech that they opened up the door to the bus and told Mitt to "Go get em boss!" ....before they had made sure the bus was stopped and Mitt fell flat on his face.


I expect that the person getting Mitt ready next time will have the tax return "issue" answered in a far better manner.

[alanmolstad]

As for the "Facts" and Mitt on Abortion?

Mitt once again insulted conservatives within the week on the issue of abortion, when he ONCE AGAIN claimed he had a "scheduling conflict" and could not attend the Pro-Life forum.

All the other guys in the race were there.

All the other guys showed the pro-Life movement the respect for this important conservative issue we are looking for in a candidate.

This what?...the 2nd or 3rd time the Pro-Life movement has open it's doors to Mitt , only to see him pretend to be just "too busy".


so sad.....

Or did Mitt just forget to show up at the pro-life forum...just like he seems to have forgot he showed up at a Planned Parenthood meeting?
(http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...mney-attended/)

Is he so forgetful?

Or.....

Is this claim to have "forgotten" about as fake as the switch in his views?
all of this stuff, based only on political need, rather than on core views?

[alanmolstad]

See that's the thing.

I lot of supporters of Mitt get angry at the conservatives like myself when we speak up and tell others we just don't trust Mitt.

I just don't really trust that Mitt shares my views on many core conservative issues.

I get called names by Mitt's supporters.

Im accused of being a Bigot.

I get accused of being bigoted against Mormons.

But the real problem here is with Mitt actions!

Im not the problem here, Mitt is!
I keep telling people that mitt can NOT WIN without the conservatives behind him .
He needs guys like me and other republicans if he wants to beat Obama.

And yet every time there is a door open to Mitt that he could use to open up the lines of conversations between himself and conservatives what does he do?


He walks....


This last week's pro-Life forum was a golden opportunity for Mitt to show every conservative that he can be there for us...he could have spoken to the whole pro-life movement and put to rest any doubt over his personal views.

and what did he do?

What was he interested in doing?....I don't know but it sure had nothing to do with reaching out to pro-Life conservatives.


So My doubts about Mitt at this point have nothing to do with his religion.
I have already had to defend my view that religion is not an issue for me, regardless of the faith of the person it makes no difference to me in the voting booth.

But i do have an issue with Mitt over what i see is a lack of outreach to conservatives, and the fact that I don't believe many of the things he says about his views.

And, top that off with the fact that mitt seems to not be interested at all in changing my views about him, well.....all this points to the conclusion that Mitt thinks he can ignore the conservatives during the election and then can count on them to "come around" to support him later in November.

This is what Bob Dole thought
This is what McCain thought....

and it seems to be the playbook that Mitt is using this time around too.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

I never watched the debate so i will have to look that one up.

But just looking at it as you have presented it here , I got to say that is the most weird thing he could have said.

Im not really sure what the deal is with him and his tax returns?
Why not have them ready to go when you head to Iowa at the start?
Whats the big deal?
We all have tax returns right?

6 months before Iowa you announce you are running for President on a Monday....get all the free press and media hype all week long, and then just as the news guys are going home on Friday night you send out your tax return statement....By Monday morning when everyone goes back to work it's "old news' and a non-issue.

If you are running for President you got to be able to lay your financial cards on the table...

The "I dont know" quote makes it seem like he was hiding something...like there is something in the tax returns that he has hidden from his wife or something?...


Or was his math bad back in 2010 and he got a bigger return that he should have?..

Or will we find out that his real name is "Mitt The Dude, Romney" ?

Putting out their tax return is one of the basic things the people running for President have to do.
It's expected.

The "I dont know" answer does point back to Mitt's staff as you say, and it does show that 'something is very wrong there"...if all the better answer he had for the "Tax return issue" is an answer you expect from a juvenile.

To me it's like Mitt's staff had him so well ready to give the next campaign speech that they opened up the door to the bus and told Mitt to "Go get em boss!" ....before they had made sure the bus was stopped and Mitt fell flat on his face.


I expect that the person getting Mitt ready next time will have the tax return "issue" answered in a far better manner.

I should have pointed out that his "I don't know" answer was in response to whether or not he would release his last TWELVE years of tax returns like his dad did when he ran.

Romney did say that he would release his tax records when they are done in April. I guess this is a common practice among candidates to release them when they have the current year as well. Romney explained that the reason for this is not to release tax records and then release them again. It sounded plausible. I think Newt released his because Romney is getting such flack. I guess Romney's comeback is now asking Newt to release what he was fined for for his ethics violations.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

See that's the thing.

I lot of supporters of Mitt get angry at the conservatives like myself when we speak up and tell others we just don't trust Mitt.

I just don't really trust that Mitt shares my views on many core conservative issues.

I get called names by Mitt's supporters.

Im accused of being a Bigot.

I get accused of being bigoted against Mormons.

But the real problem here is with Mitt actions!

Im not the problem here, Mitt is!
I keep telling people that mitt can NOT WIN without the conservatives behind him .
He needs guys like me and other republicans if he wants to beat Obama.

And yet every time there is a door open to Mitt that he could use to open up the lines of conversations between himself and conservatives what does he do?


He walks....


This last week's pro-Life forum was a golden opportunity for Mitt to show every conservative that he can be there for us...he could have spoken to the whole pro-life movement and put to rest any doubt over his personal views.

and what did he do?

What was he interested in doing?....I don't know but it sure had nothing to do with reaching out to pro-Life conservatives.


So My doubts about Mitt at this point have nothing to do with his religion.
I have already had to defend my view that religion is not an issue for me, regardless of the faith of the person it makes no difference to me in the voting booth.

But i do have an issue with Mitt over what i see is a lack of outreach to conservatives, and the fact that I don't believe many of the things he says about his views.

And, top that off with the fact that mitt seems to not be interested at all in changing my views about him, well.....all this points to the conclusion that Mitt thinks he can ignore the conservatives during the election and then can count on them to "come around" to support him later in November.

This is what Bob Dole thought
This is what McCain thought....

and it seems to be the playbook that Mitt is using this time around too.

But you seem to trust Newt who not only has cheated on two wives, he appears to have cheated on his *** as a representative (hence the ethics violations) and took 1.6 million from Freddie. My problem isn't that you can't trust Mitt, but it seems inconsistent that you would then excuse Newt whose moral concerns seem much greater.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

But you seem to trust Newt who not only has cheated on two wives,

Its like this,,,,,
Now this is all connected so follow me here...

I have no problem voting for a Mormon for President.

"But you are a strong Christian Alan, how can you vote for a person who believes in a false god?"

I can vote for him for president,
I can hire him to fix my roof,
I can allow a Mormon doctor to fix my heart,

BECAUSE they can do it.....
because they have merit to do the *** based on the criteria needed to do that ***.

If the Mormon heart doctor knows how to operate on my heart, then he gets the ***.

If the Mormon roofer knows how to fix the water leak in my roof, then he gets the ***.

If the Mormon politician knows how to be a good president, then he gets the ***.

Remember, Im not hiring them, or voting for them, to become my religious teachers...

Their religion is not an issue....
I not going to decide this just on this sideline issue of what direction they face when they spend a moment in private prayer.


Now as for Newt being a ****py husband?

My answer is that if i were deciding who in the race was the best husband?...then Newt would not have a chance of that trophy.

But Im not deciding who is the best husband, nor who is the best theology teacher.....Im only interested in the question of who represents my own views the strongest?.....

Newt does represent my views stronger than a lot of others,,,,

But do i really trust newt to be there when needed?...
No!, not for a moment.

Newts only problem is Newt.

Newt blames the media....
Newt blames the media for all this stuff with his ex-wife...(and while its true that the relationship a man has with his wife should be off limits)....the real truth is that Newt should have been a far better husband and this whole issue would not be dumped on him now....

so I don't consider Newt's past failure as a husband to be important when considering who to support for President.

Yet Im not going to say that all this media hype about his "Open Marriage' is all the media's fault...


Im not discounting Mitt because he is lost....
Im not discounting Newt because he is a ****...

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

he appears to have cheated on his *** as a representative (hence the ethics violations)

House rules are not worth the time it takes to talk about them.

The truth is that they are not laws...it's not like you break a house rule its the same as robbing a bank, or even failing to stop at a stop sign.

as far as i know any legal problems Newt had are behind him.....if there is something I dont know of, or something new that would be different.
But if all there is to this is a bunch of house rule violations?...then its moot.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

.... and took 1.6 million from Freddie. .

I dont hold people that land good ***s as being somehow in the wrong.

If people land a *** like that thay pays as good, all i can say is, "Nicely done"

I dont blame rich people for my own situation

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

..... you can't trust Mitt,.....

I dont judge my ablity to trust him by the god he worships, or the women he sleeps with, or the number of times he does other personal things i would never do...


I dont trust his political leadership, and this lack of trust I have for him is based only on his own past political fip-flops.....

Mitt's personal life is a moot point.


the fact that Mitt's dog wags his tail whenever Mitt walks into the room is moot...it's nice, but moot to the question of Who would I trust the most as President to strongly represent my views?

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Romney did say that he would release .......

"would release"?

Thats where he gets into trouble......

the fact is, that this sort of thing is expected now from the people running for president...more so when they have lots of money....

The real truth is, that for some unknown reason no one on Mitt's staff has spoke up and demanded the Mitt come clean and get this issue in the past.

Mitt's staff....that the unknown question Im starting to have right now.
are they just a bunch of hero-worshiping "yes" men?

I would love to know what they are saying to each other now.

A President has to have men around him that he trusts enough to listen to,...and they got to be smart enough to know a right way and a wrong way to do things to protect the president.....

someone dropped the ball....

[alanmolstad]

the correct way?


During the last debate, when Newt demands, "When will Mitt Romney show us his tax return?"

all eyes turn to Mitt ,who opens a envelope...looks up at the camera, smiles and says

"You mean this?" and throws his tax returns for the last 12 years across the floor in front of Newt, while he says...

"There you go Newt, my tax returns,, the only ones you will ever get to see...So if you want to know how much I made last year?...Pick them off the floor!"




and....the issue fades away.....

[alanmolstad]

Now.....time to talk about the upcoming Sc primary and the outcomes that may arrive and their meanings.


Everyone thinks Mitt will win big.
and Mitt would love to win, and win big in SC.

So if Mitt wins big what does it mean?
it means the end of the line for most of the people in this.

Oh a few might hang on untill Florida, but the truth is, if Mitt wins big it means that the conservatives in enough numbers do support him, and the race is all but over.


what if Mitt wins, but its close?
Then, Mitt is still in good shape going into Florida, but it will be more fun to watch.

What if Newt wins?
Good lord that would make this a fun race.
If Newt wins, even if its only by one vote, it would shift things, and all of the sudden the conservatives would have 'the guy" they were looking for......or close enough to him anyway.

if newt wins, it would kick this race not only into Florida, but could then drag out to next month, and perhaps even longer...its all up to how long newt could keep his big mouth shut...


What if Rick wins or comes in a close 2nd?
Then it might spark a bit of hope for him, but its still a long road he would have a head of himself.

What if Ron paul wins?
Then suddenly Sc becomes a moot point, and EVERYONE gets to do this again in Florida.


what would it take to get Rick out of the race?
3rd place will end Rick's run.

What will it take to get Ron out of the race?
4th place will really hurt Ron paul...but we would still have to go out to the western primarys to see how he does there?

What will it take to get Newt out of the race?
again,,,newt can finish in Sc in 1st, 2nd, 3rd....but if he is in 4th its going to be hard to see the point in going on from there.

so the real race now is to get out of 3rd and 4th place....

Mitt would love to win big.
mitt would love this to be more of less the end of the republican primary, and after this is all be a victory tour for him.

Mitt would Love...LOVE to see Ron and Rick and Newt all get about 12% of the vote.....and he picks up the rest.


Rick needs to finish above Newt.....with luck above Ron Paul too,,,But Rick has to finish above Newt to make it to Florida.


Newt needs to make a challenge in Sc to Mitt.
Newt needs to win...he needs to win, or be a close 2nd.

Ron Paul would love to win, love to come in 2nd...needs to be a close 3rd...and will have a hard time going on if he lands in 4th and is sinking.

[alanmolstad]

My predictions?

I don't know the future.
I never predicted for a moment that rick had actually won Iowa...but it turns out he did.

So Im just as much in the dark as to who will win in Sc as anyone else.

But i can make two different types of predictions -
I can predict the most likely winner, and the most fun out come of the primary.

The most likely winner at this point is Mitt.
it is very likely based only on the polls I have seen that Mitt will win, and win big.
It is also likely that in 2nd place will be Ron Paul. followed by Newt a with Rick a distant 4th.

In the last 24 hours I have seen other polls, but I just dont trust them all that much.

Should it be Mitt-Ron-Newt-Rick in the Sc primary it would be about the end of the line for Rick and likely also for Newt.


so right now thats the most likely result in SC

But what result would be the most fun?
It would be the most fun if Newt actually came in 1st place.
That type of thing would open up this for another good month or two.

The most fun would be, Newt in 1st....and that that point who really cares who came in 2nd 3rd and 4th?

what if Ron or Rick wins?
then I never saw that coming....

but it would be fun to see...

[alanmolstad]

so....the media expects Mitt to win...

But the most fun thing to happen would be if Newt wins in SC.

and, if on the odd chance Newt were to win, what would that mean to Mitt?

Mostly it would mean that the race turns to Florida and a real shoot out there.

But underneath that simple fact, there would also be the understanding that the conservatives are simply never going to come around to Mitt....

and thats trouble, for even if Mitt wins the nomination he still needs the core republican conservatives to beat Obama....

a Newt win would be the signal that Mitt will never have the needed core of the Party.

[alanmolstad]

Julie......on a side note:

recently I noticed an odd thing that involved me and 2 of my posts.

People used 2 of my posts in such a way as had not happened here before, and Im not really sure how i feel about it.

Im also not sure i have cause to complain about it, or even if I should feel good about this whole thing or not?

I seek your views as to what do YOU think are the proper manners?


The issue is this:
On topic (A) I posted a nice mid-size comment on the topic we were dealing with.
I worked hard on my comment, (as you know I always try to do) and sent it out onto the forum once I looked at it a while and felt it said and even looked the way I wanted it to.

You know my posts are not just jotted down ideas to me, I actually care how they look on your computer screen.
I dress them up to look good, before i send them off to the dance.
So I guess in that way my posts take on something as close to being a form of "art" in my eyes.

I care what they say.

I care what they look like.

They are like my little warriors that I get ready and send off to battle on the internet.


I try to write my comments to look their best, be easy to read, and cause the reader to want to write back to me, so that i can keep the conversation going and write back to them too.



Except something new happened yesterday
.....when someone reads my comments, and feels the need to answer them, BUT rather than just answering my comment with another comment right below it, they instead copy the text of my comment, then go off and start another whole new topic with it that I know nothing about!

There they start this topic with my quoted words at the very top of the new page, and then add their own attacks ripping my ideas and all this without me knowing anything about it.


I just think that .....well.....I just think that if I had lifted your words in the same manner, that I think I would owe you a "heads-up" to the fact that your words are way over on another new topic and being talked about without you knowing ahead of time.


I just think it would be nice to let a guy know his words that he took so long to write in order to keep a conversation going, have appeared on another topic and are the reason for that other new topic...

I feel happy that my words are out there giving people ideas for new topics.

yet, I also a bit offended because I wish they would tell me about it.





Julie, your input on the matter?

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Julie, your input on the matter?

I have seen this type of thing too. I am not sure what to think about it. It seems as if they just want your comment as a jumping point. I personally don't like it when someone says "BJ thinks this"---let alone quoting me and then bashing on to something else.

I can say that there are people I ignore on this thread; so then they can just rip me and I don't even see it. *sigh*

My own personal opinion is that anyone who really reads up in this place can see the personalities of those posting. Those who just stop in and read may have to go back and read up to get a better feel of what is going on. I hope that is what happens anyway.

I look at the way I look at stuff on the web. One time I was just looking for a pair of gloves that I like and came across a blog. It captured my interest enough that I started to read up--who was this person, what was she like. Well, I spent most of the night reading up on her and then finally came across that she had died a few months earlier from cancer. I didn't know her and other than her blog knew very little about her. She had young children and an obvious love of life. So, here I sat in my office, crying my eyes out for someone I never met and knew very little about---and yet, there was enough that I wanted to understand more.

So, i guess my hope is that who ever reads your posts in this light, will do as I do---dig around a little, read up a little more on what you think and how you think.

I guess what I am ultimately saying is--don't sweat it. It may peak someone's curiousity enough to read a few more of your posts. For the rest, they will probably forget what they read the next day.

P.S. Newt is surging in S.C.!!!! Acckkk. While you don't worry about his marriage morals or his ethical violations, I see a pattern of a man who is very selfish and does what he wants regardless of how it affects others. Please, let it be Mitt or Rick! I would even go for Ron Paul over him and I see Ron Paul as radical, but at least honest and cares about others.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

I
P.S. Newt is surging in S.C.!!!! Acckkk. .....

while this is "interesting" and will likely add to the fun of watching Florida, its not enough to start a "panic" yet for the Mitt supporters.

Lets just remember, Mitt is from the north, and he is not really all that reflective of the typical SC conservative voter.
So, even if Mitt were to lose the SC Primary, its not like he lost New York , or California or something.

So the race goes on if Newt wins.

BUT, not for everyone.

Rick has to have a big night, or its the end of the road.
I dont care the Rick says he will push on to other states, i just dont see him getting any cash with less than a 2nd place finish in SC.

Ron Paul will go on no matter what place he comes in.
From Ron Paul's point of view we have not even gotten to the States he will poll the best in.

Newt seems to maybe actually have a chance of winning SC.
Hard to believe, be the early polls seem to suggest this.

While this is not all that bad of news for Mitt, it is nonetheless a very big sign to everyone in the race that "Mitt cant get the conservatives to back him.

That is going to really fire up Newt if Newt takes 1st or a close 2nd.
It would also tempt Rick to stay in the race until Florida....


Should be an interesting night!

Come back when its over and share your views....

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

......
So, i guess my hope is that who ever reads your posts in this light, will do as I do---dig around a little, read up a little more on what you think and how you think.

I guess what I am ultimately saying is--don't sweat it. ....

I shall listen to your advice on this matter.

I have some issues with not being told my post that i felt I defended on one topic, now appears on a different topic where the same guy rips it apart and Im not there to defend it....

But, well.......who cares?

I cant do anything about it,
its not against the rules,
and whats the heck, it actually may be a form of a compliment to find that my words are so easy to read that they can cause new topics to start all on their own.

Im going to just smile ......

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Should be an interesting night!

Come back when its over and share your views....

Yes, it should be an interesting night. I am surprised that the conservatives are going toward Newt instead of Rick. As I said---acckkk. I don't know how anyone can see Newt a conservative. He debates well, but that is about it. His politics are less than desirable. I don't think I could vote for him personally.

That said, I turned on "rush" on the radio to see if he was reporting any results. The ten minutes I listened to while making dinner---he announced that Mitt Romney gave away all the money he inherited from his father (to the BYU MBA school) and then made an excuse that he needed to get away from his father's success. Yeah right---who gives away money and is looked down on? Only from Rush I guess.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

I shall listen to your advice on this matter.

I have some issues with not being told my post that i felt I defended on one topic, now appears on a different topic where the same guy rips it apart and Im not there to defend it....

But, well.......who cares?

I cant do anything about it,
its not against the rules,
and whats the heck, it actually may be a form of a compliment to find that my words are so easy to read that they can cause new topics to start all on their own.

Im going to just smile ......

Yeah, I see my words misquoted, my ideas mispresented all of the time here. There is not a lot to be done. *sigh*. It is good you can look at it with a smile.

[alanmolstad]

Newt wins in SC.

I like to allow a little time to p*** before I comment too much on an election.
But there are some clear lessons learned from tonight's results.



1st.- we now have the final answer about the conservatives backing Mitt in the national election...They will not!

It seems very clear to us now that Conservative Republicans and Christians like myself will vote for ANYONE other than Mitt.

The fact the Newt won tonight I think has less to do with Conservatives love of Newt, and more to do with a serious and very deep lack of trust in Mitt.

2nd - tonight showed us that this election is not going to be over the question "Who would do the best at fixing the economy?"
Tonight we saw the issue of the 'economy" taken off the table.

The rest of this election is going to be about social issues from here on out!

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Newt wins in SC.

I like to allow a little time to p*** before I comment too much on an election.
But there are some clear lessons learned from tonight's results.



1st.- we now have the final answer about the conservatives backing Mitt in the national election...They will not!

It seems very clear to us now that Conservative Republicans and Christians like myself will vote for ANYONE other than Mitt.

The fact the Newt won tonight I think has less to do with Conservatives love of Newt, and more to do with a serious and very deep lack of trust in Mitt.

2nd - tonight showed us that this election is not going to be over the question "Who would do the best at fixing the economy?"
Tonight we saw the issue of the 'economy" taken off the table.

The rest of this election is going to be about social issues from here on out!

It is amazing to me that "christians and conservatives" do not trust Mitt because of his pro-abortion stance years back and yet they will trust...

a man who has committed ethical violations, cheated on not one, but two wives, and has taken 1.6 million from an organization that spelled the doom for the American economy AND has been liberal on many issues in the past as well. *sigh*

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

It is amazing to me that "christians and conservatives" do not trust Mitt because of his pro-abortion stance years back and yet they will trust...

a man who has committed ethical violations, cheated on not one, but two wives, and has taken 1.6 million from an organization that spelled the doom for the American economy AND has been liberal on many issues in the past as well. *sigh*

The topic of "abortion" is seen as political.

Yes its also social, but we are electing a President and that is a political office.

So to judge a person in this election on that topic I would look to what they say, and what type of track record they have on the issue.

that is how a person should judge people on political questions.



Im not really interested in his women now or ex-wives of the past or stuff like that.

any of the stuff that is not connected to the political issue of abortion is more or less a moot point.

This is why conservatives just look at Mitt and just dont see his views as "real"........
Mitt sometimes says the right things, but there is this dry "calculating" way he seems to address conservative issues that casts a doubt over his words...

Remember we are NOT picking out the guy who is the best husband.
If we were Mitt would win easy....

What we are doing is picking out a guy to represent our political views in the national election.

Newt was never the conservative's 1st choice...but he is looking like he is the last guy standing.

[alanmolstad]

Where did Rick fail?

lets review:
Rick came in a very close 2nd place in Iowa, Yes we learned this week that Rick actually won, but at the time we all were told he came in 2nd.

This was GREAT news for Rick!
Finally he had broken free of the rest of the pack and was now on center stage with Mitt.

So what went wrong?

How did he go from being the star of the show, to now needed to find the best way to walk off the stage?

I think I have the answer to that question.


It was in the debate after Iowa where i think all of the nation's conservatives had a real serious look at Rick, and it was due to the way he presented himself in that debate that Conservatives decided they were not done looking at the other names on the list yet.


To tell the truth, i watched that debate and I remember at the time thinking that Rick is coming off like he is just not at the same level as the other guys in the debate.

Almost like rick should have a name tag that says "TRAINEE" under his name.




This was kinda like what happened to Rick Perry too.

Perry had all the conservative hype going into the debates before Iowa, but then the first debate happens, and Perry just seemed "Not ready" to play in the big leagues.


Perry seemed to me to almost present himself to the world as someone who a moment ago was sleeping in the audience, and was only drafted to come up and debating because the real guy could not make it.