Is Mitt Romney the Right Choice for the GOP in 2024?

  • Topic: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter ThomasT
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
Sign up Log in
735 replies · 84K views
Number Nine said:
I don't think very many Democrats and independents consider Romney to be a "moderate"; certainly not as far right as the more fashionable Republican candidates, but not a moderate from the perspective of less "conservative Christian"-inclined Americans.

Why are you describing the independents/Dems in a religious framework - Mitt isn't running a religion-oriented campaign. Mitt is running primarily on his executive level experience.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
WhoWee said:
Why are you describing the independents/Dems in a religious framework - Mitt isn't running a religion-oriented campaign. Mitt is running primarily on his executive level experience.

I'm not describing him in a religious framework. That's not what I said.
 
Number Nine said:
I'm not describing him in a religious framework. That's not what I said.

You didn't describe Mitt that way - you described the voters that way - "but not a moderate from the perspective of less "conservative Christian"-inclined Americans."
 
Some mother, Mrs. Churo, told Romney that her daughter, serving in Afghanistan, wants to know why we are still there after having killed Bin Laden. The mother says the daughter is confused about why she is still there. I take it that the daughter thought the mission in Afganistan had been to take out Bin Laden which was not the case, and that when we did take him out and didn't leave, it dawned on her that the mission was a different one, but in the ensuing year she hadn't been able to ferret out what that mission was. Apparently, now she has given up trying. Quoting the mother quoting the daughter "There is no mission here. We have no definition of a mission."

Romney took a dim view of this. "If your daughter is not familiar with the mission that she's on, how in the world can the commander in chief sleep at night, knowing that we have soldiers in harm's way that don't know exactly, precisely, what it is that they're doing there". Actually, it was soldier, not soldiers, but he's proabably right, there's more than one. But here's the kicker. Romney knows what the mission is. Romney said, he fully understood its purpose to be helping Afghan forces to achieve sovereignty and security."

The way I see it, the President must have called Romney and told him what the mission was adding "but don't tell Churo." Then tried to get some sleep. Most likely it didn't sit well with Romney that he was keeping this information under his hat and couldn't sleep himself. That's why he figured the President couldn't sleep either. So it was a bleary-eyed Romney that slipped up and told the mother what the mission is. Hopefully, the mother will now tell her daughter and everybody can get some sleep.
 
Jimmy Snyder said:
Some mother, Mrs. Churo, told Romney that her daughter, serving in Afghanistan, wants to know why we are still there after having killed Bin Laden. The mother says the daughter is confused about why she is still there. I take it that the daughter thought the mission in Afganistan had been to take out Bin Laden which was not the case, and that when we did take him out and didn't leave, it dawned on her that the mission was a different one, but in the ensuing year she hadn't been able to ferret out what that mission was. Apparently, now she has given up trying. Quoting the mother quoting the daughter "There is no mission here. We have no definition of a mission."

Romney took a dim view of this. "If your daughter is not familiar with the mission that she's on, how in the world can the commander in chief sleep at night, knowing that we have soldiers in harm's way that don't know exactly, precisely, what it is that they're doing there". Actually, it was soldier, not soldiers, but he's proabably right, there's more than one. But here's the kicker. Romney knows what the mission is. Romney said, he fully understood its purpose to be helping Afghan forces to achieve sovereignty and security."

The way I see it, the President must have called Romney and told him what the mission was adding "but don't tell Churo." Then tried to get some sleep. Most likely it didn't sit well with Romney that he was keeping this information under his hat and couldn't sleep himself. That's why he figured the President couldn't sleep either. So it was a bleary-eyed Romney that slipped up and told the mother what the mission is. Hopefully, the mother will now tell her daughter and everybody can get some sleep.

Perhaps Mitt believes the soldier(s) should know why they are in harm's way - is that unreasonable?
 
WhoWee said:
Perhaps Mitt believes the soldier(s) should know why they are in harm's way - is that unreasonable?
Perhaps all he wanted was a reason to say something bad about Obama. Again, Romney knows why we are there. Why doesn't the soldier? Did Obama do something to prevent her from knowing what Romney knows?
 
Jimmy Snyder said:
Perhaps all he wanted was a reason to say something bad about Obama. Again, Romney knows why we are there. Why doesn't the soldier? Did Obama do something to prevent her from knowing what Romney knows?

I'm reading the quote you posted

""If your daughter is not familiar with the mission that she's on, how in the world can the commander in chief sleep at night, knowing that we have soldiers in harm's way that don't know exactly, precisely, what it is that they're doing there". "

and I don't see any indication that Mitt meant Obama did anything to prevent her from knowing anything - it also doesn't specify that Romney knows anything special - it infers (IMO) that President Obama has not communicated adequately with/to the troops. The comment (IMO) implies that President Obama doesn't have a strategic plan.
 
WhoWee said:
The comment (IMO) implies that President Obama doesn't have a strategic plan.
It doesn't mention strategic plan anywhere, just mission. And I still can't find out how Romney was able to find out what the mission is and the soldier wasn't. What could Obama have possibly done so that Romney knew and the soldier didn't know. After years of wondering too.

Edit. It might help to ask Romney how he found out what the mission is. If he could recall where he heard it, it might help us understand.
 
Last edited:
WhoWee said:
Perhaps Mitt believes the soldier(s) should know why they are in harm's way - is that unreasonable?
If Mitt Romney were shown transcripts of speeches (yes, naturally they must be secret transcripts that only I - and Google - know of) given by the President to the troops (including a couple after Bin Laden's killing), where the Commander describes the mission to the troops, how would he reconcile that with his opinion on the President's amazing knack for slumber?

PS: This reminds me of a bit of trivia that I'll pose as a question: In 2006, Zogby polled about a 1000 members of the military that were stationed in Iraq at the time. What fraction of the respondents said that the U.S. mission in Iraq was mainly to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks? Choices: (1) less that 5% (2) 5% to 20% (3) 20% to 50% (4) more than 50%
 
Last edited:
Point taken about misconceptions, confirmation bias among the public. To insure the point was general, and not a narrower political point, let me add my own: A Zogby 2007 poll of the US public found what fraction of Democrats believed Pres. Bush either let 911 happen or made it happen: 1)<5, 2)5-20, 3)20-41, 4)more than 42%?
 
Jimmy Snyder said:
It doesn't mention strategic plan anywhere, just mission. And I still can't find out how Romney was able to find out what the mission is and the soldier wasn't. What could Obama have possibly done so that Romney knew and the soldier didn't know. After years of wondering too.

Edit. It might help to ask Romney how he found out what the mission is. If he could recall where he heard it, it might help us understand.

Where does it say that Mitt claims to know the President's plan?
 
WhoWee said:
Where does it say that Mitt claims to know the President's plan?
It says so about halfway down Jimmy's post. Also, here, for instance: The former Massachusetts governor said he found the president's failure to make the mission clear one of the "most disturbing and hard to explain" elements of Obama's tenure. Though American troops may have a hard time finding clarity in their mission, Romney said, he fully understood its purpose to be helping Afghan forces to achieve sovereignty and security.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57390114-503544/romney-to-mother-of-army-daughter-how-can-obama-sleep-at-night/
 
This morning my wife asked me how I could sleep at night knowing that WhoWee didn't get the point. And here's the kicker. Then she said that she did get the point.
 
Jimmy Snyder said:
This morning my wife asked me how I could sleep at night knowing that WhoWee didn't get the point. And here's the kicker. Then she said that she did get the point.

:smile:Ok - to be fair though, you only had one quotation mark - didn't think it was a direct quote.

( Actually, it was soldier, not soldiers, but he's proabably right, there's more than one. But here's the kicker. Romney knows what the mission is. Romney said, he fully understood its purpose to be helping Afghan forces to achieve sovereignty and security." )
 
Sorry to be so rough. The funny thing is, I support Romney and expect to vote for him in the general election. But this is the silly season and if he acts silly, I'll say so.
 
I don't see why this issue is so difficult. All that happened is that a soldier's mom said something stupid (under emotional strain, but still) and like any good politician should, Romney used it to take a cheap shot at Obama. So can we turn the page now from this silly tangent, please?
 
It seems to me the longer silly stuff like this is the only negative against Mitt Romney - and it's discussed as being silly - Mitt wins.

On another note - label IMO - a friend in Ohio told me Santorum isn't on the ballot in his Congressional District - not sure which one? He indicated Romney, Gingrich and Paul are on the ballot.
 
russ_watters said:
I don't see why this issue is so difficult. All that happened is that a soldier's mom said something stupid (under emotional strain, but still) and like any good politician should, Romney used it to take a cheap shot at Obama. So can we turn the page now from this silly tangent, please?
Yes sir!
 
Gokul43201 said:
PS: This reminds me of a bit of trivia that I'll pose as a question: In 2006, Zogby polled about a 1000 members of the military that were stationed in Iraq at the time. What fraction of the respondents said that the U.S. mission in Iraq was mainly to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks? Choices: (1) less that 5% (2) 5% to 20% (3) 20% to 50% (4) more than 50%

I don't think it's really constructive to post polls without the end result. I suggest you use the spoiler feature.
 
MarcoD said:
I don't think it's really constructive to post polls without the end result. I suggest you use the spoiler feature.
The number is easily googled (I think).

In any case, the correct answer is:
85% of the respondents
To mheslep: I was actually trying to make a more specific (sociological, not political) point, but I'll accept your point as worthy of consideration as well, and agree with Russ to stop beating a dead horse (which perhaps wouldn't have needed so much beating if everyone agreed that it was indeed dead).
 
Removed dumb comment. This made me laugh:

http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/64632_10150700571251083_598386082_11592523_228991957_n.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MarcoD said:
I am not sure it is fake, but if it is real, it is the best freudian slip in history.

http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/64632_10150700571251083_598386082_11592523_228991957_n.jpg

:smile:! I'm going to check if it's a fake...but I agree, that's really funny!

Edit:
This site says it's altered, but it still is funny!

http://news.icanhascheezburger.com/...romney-photoshop-keeping-the-internet-honest/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why I Am Supporting Mitt Romney

I'm non-religious, and the idea of voting Republican, irks me a little, but Romney is the only candidate I can find myself supporting.

Newt and Santorum will tolerate the spread of extreme fundamentalist Christianity domestically.

Ron Paul and Barack Obama will tolerate the spread of extreme fundamentalist Islam abroad.

Romney has made it clear that he is religiously tolerant (and being from a minority religion, he will have to be), supporting separation of church and state while opposing radical islam abroad.

I don't think Obama has done a good enough job recovering the economy, curtailing the national deficit and holding down gas prices.

Newt, Paul and Santorum are unelectable and even if they were, I'd prefer Obama over them.

Those other 4 candidates have spent a large chunk of their life on government payroll and never had a real job, while Romney built a career for himself.

Romney has the most experience of any presidential candidate since Eisenhower or the founding fathers. Law/MBA from Harvard. Successful CEO of multi-billion dollar corporation. Successful management of the 2002 Olympics. Successful Governor of MA with an overwhelming opposition Congress. A strong well-organized campaign (since 2008) with a circle of experts (including my favorite modern economist, Greg Mankiw).

Yes, yes, I know, I know. I believe in evolution and conventional wisdom says we should all support Obama's re-election campaign. I think conventional wisdom is wrong.

Maybe we should go for experience and accomplishment and merit over rhetoric.
 
We're keepng it one thread per candidate.
 
Evo said:
We're keepng it one thread per candidate.

I didn't know there was a Mitt Romney page. Thanks for moving it.
 


jduster said:
Newt and Santorum will tolerate the spread of extreme fundamentalist Christianity domestically. (This one is pretty well known, so I'll cut you some slack)

Ron Paul and Barack Obama will tolerate the spread of extreme fundamentalist Islam abroad.

Romney has made it clear that he is religiously tolerant (and being from a minority religion, he will have to be), supporting separation of church and state while opposing radical islam abroad.

Newt, Paul and Santorum are unelectable.

Those other 4 candidates have spent a large chunk of their life on government payroll and never had a real job, while Romney built a career for himself.

Romney has the most experience of any presidential candidate since Eisenhower or the founding fathers. Law/MBA from Harvard. Successful CEO of multi-billion dollar corporation. Successful management of the 2002 Olympics. Successful Governor of MA with an overwhelming opposition Congress. A strong well-organized campaign (since 2008) with a circle of experts (including my favorite modern economist, Greg Mankiw).
I'm afraid that you will have to cite mainstream sources to back up each statement you've claimed as fact. If you haven't read the P&WA rules for posting, I suggest that you do so now.
 
Last edited:
"the spread of extreme fundamentalist Islam abroad."

are you equating "fundamentalist Islam" with terrorism? Not all fundamentalist Muslims are terrorists, and not all terrorists are fundamentalist Muslims. Therefore, I don't see why allowing the spread of fundamentalist Islam can be considered a bad thing.

There are fundamentalist Christians who are terrorists, does this mean we should curb the spread of fundamentalist Christianity?
 
SHISHKABOB said:
There are fundamentalist Christians who are terrorists, does this mean we should curb the spread of fundamentalist Christianity?

Yes, I think so. Fundamentalism, by it's very definition, is a bad thing. (Unless you're using a rather esoteric definition of the term.) Obviously, we should also keep in mind that the medicine must not be worse than the cure.
 

Similar threads

Why Does Mitt Romney Pay Lower Taxes Than His Secretary?
  • SW VandeCarr
  • · Replies 95 ·
  • General Discussion
4
Replies
95