TexasCHLforum.com

sjfcontrol wrote:And so of the people who actually have a chance of winning in November, who might that be?

I don't think Romney is going to win.

I believe the apathy and ignorance of the American voter has finally created a situation we won't be able to recover from as a unified nation.

I'm not looking forward to the next 20 years or so....

Texas Dan Mosby wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:And so of the people who actually have a chance of winning in November, who might that be?

I don't think Romney is going to win.

I believe the apathy and ignorance of the American voter has finally created a situation we won't be able to recover from as a unified nation.

I'm not looking forward to the next 20 years or so....

Well, I disagree. I didn't see apathy and ignorance in the 2010 elections, I saw a tea-party route. I saw Obama lose the house, and almost lose the Senate. I see Obama whining about being behind Romney in funding. I see a president that said after his election that if things hadn't improved by now, he'd be a one-term president, and things have gotten worse in the last few months -- 1.5% growth. I see massive unemployment, ESPECIALLY of his base.

I'm not ready to give up yet, not by a long shot.

sjfcontrol wrote:And so of the people who actually have a chance of winning in November, who might that be?

The answer depends if the Republicans have the guts to nominate a conservative at the end of the month.

bizarrenormality wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:And so of the people who actually have a chance of winning in November, who might that be?

The answer depends if the Republicans have the guts to nominate a conservative at the end of the month.

With all due respect, it's not a matter of "guts." Your proposition entirely ignores the realm of political reality for a couple of reasons:

1. Romney is far from perfect, but he is a long sight better than the incumbent. If you can't see it, it's because you don't want to.
2. Romney won in the primary. He won the right to be the nominee, whether or not you or I like it. That's how parties work. Nobody seriously thinks anymore that a nomination happens because 5 guys in a dark room speak it into being. It doesn't; not when there are literally millions of involved voters. The man (or woman) with the biggest support is going to be the nominee. For better or for worse, the republican voters of America elected a less than perfect candidate in a fair fight.

So that is the reality of it. The nomination is already decided. If one of the other candidates had maintained a close 2nd place, it is possible that there could be a brokered convention. But not only did that not happen, but the losing candidates have already given their support to Romney, releasing their delegates to him. So he's the nominee, protests to the contrary notwithstanding. Some of us need to get over that and move on.

We have a choice to make from among 4 possibilities:

1. Vote for Obama
2. Vote for Romney
3. Vote for a third party candidate
4. Stay home in protest

Here are the irrefutable consequences of each of those choices:

1. Helps to keep Obama in office
2. Helps to replace Obama with Romney
3. Helps to keep Obama in office
4. Helps to keep Obama in office.

Now, you may have a third party candidate or write in candidate that you prefer to vote for, but the above 4 possibilities are immutable. There isn't a political scientist in the nation, from Libertarian to Republican to Democrat who would disagree with that analysis. If you disagree, that is wishful thinking. There is not one single other possible candidate that can beat Obama except Romney, because there is not one other single candidate besides Romney who has even a prayer of getting enough votes. It doesn't matter if your libertarian sensibilities are correct or not, there simply are not enough voters who will agree with you to vote for whomever your favorite is.

So you really have to decide which is worse, and vote accordingly. I will tell you that a business associate of mine just moved here from Massachusetts on June 1 of this year. He is a hard core libertarian. He has lived under a Romney governorship and hates him. He is also going to vote for Romney over Obama because he realistically knows that electing Obama a second time will destroy the nation irreparably; and so he is going to set aside his pride for the good of the nation.

I would encourage you to do no less than vote your conscience, but I cannot let those kinds of comments pass without stating the hard truth for the sake of clarity. I value clarity above most other things, even when I don't like what that clarity reveals to me. So just be clear that your vote will do one of those 4 things listed above. Whatever you think your motives are, you cannot escape the clarity of those 4 choices, because your motives may inform your choices, but your choices will always have consequences that you may not have intended—and that's just the cold hard facts.

george wrote: Well, he may be annoying, but I do believe he has hit the nail on the head this time.

It's the "Annoyed" man, not the "Annoying" man -- we've been through this before...

george wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:

bizarrenormality wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:And so of the people who actually have a chance of winning in November, who might that be?

The answer depends if the Republicans have the guts to nominate a conservative at the end of the month.

With all due respect, it's not a matter of "guts." Your proposition entirely ignores the realm of political reality for a couple of reasons:

1. Romney is far from perfect, but he is a long sight better than the incumbent. If you can't see it, it's because you don't want to.
2. Romney won in the primary. He won the right to be the nominee, whether or not you or I like it. That's how parties work. Nobody seriously thinks anymore that a nomination happens because 5 guys in a dark room speak it into being. It doesn't; not when there are literally millions of involved voters. The man (or woman) with the biggest support is going to be the nominee. For better or for worse, the republican voters of America elected a less than perfect candidate in a fair fight.

So that is the reality of it. The nomination is already decided. If one of the other candidates had maintained a close 2nd place, it is possible that there could be a brokered convention. But not only did that not happen, but the losing candidates have already given their support to Romney, releasing their delegates to him. So he's the nominee, protests to the contrary notwithstanding. Some of us need to get over that and move on.

We have a choice to make from among 4 possibilities:

1. Vote for Obama
2. Vote for Romney
3. Vote for a third party candidate
4. Stay home in protest

Here are the irrefutable consequences of each of those choices:

1. Helps to keep Obama in office
2. Helps to replace Obama with Romney
3. Helps to keep Obama in office
4. Helps to keep Obama in office.

Now, you may have a third party candidate or write in candidate that you prefer to vote for, but the above 4 possibilities are immutable. There isn't a political scientist in the nation, from Libertarian to Republican to Democrat who would disagree with that analysis. If you disagree, that is wishful thinking. There is not one single other possible candidate that can beat Obama except Romney, because there is not one other single candidate besides Romney who has even a prayer of getting enough votes. It doesn't matter if your libertarian sensibilities are correct or not, there simply are not enough voters who will agree with you to vote for whomever your favorite is.

So you really have to decide which is worse, and vote accordingly. I will tell you that a business associate of mine just moved here from Massachusetts on June 1 of this year. He is a hard core libertarian. He has lived under a Romney governorship and hates him. He is also going to vote for Romney over Obama because he realistically knows that electing Obama a second time will destroy the nation irreparably; and so he is going to set aside his pride for the good of the nation.

I would encourage you to do no less than vote your conscience, but I cannot let those kinds of comments pass without stating the hard truth for the sake of clarity. I value clarity above most other things, even when I don't like what that clarity reveals to me. So just be clear that your vote will do one of those 4 things listed above. Whatever you think your motives are, you cannot escape the clarity of those 4 choices, because your motives may inform your choices, but your choices will always have consequences that you may not have intended—and that's just the cold hard facts.

Well, he may be annoying, but I do believe he has hit the nail on the head this time.

And that is what is so annoying about him...his consistency.

sjfcontrol wrote:

george wrote: Well, he may be annoying, but I do believe he has hit the nail on the head this time.

It's the "Annoyed" man, not the "Annoying" man -- we've been through this before...

Well, in george's defense, I can be annoying.

Purplehood wrote:And that is what is so annoying about him...his consistency.

As long as I'm not consistently annoying.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

Purplehood wrote:And that is what is so annoying about him...his consistency.

As long as I'm not consistently annoying.

You seem pretty consistently conservative, which liberals might find annoying.

That's all I've got, sorry.

Obama is not unbeatable:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallu ... roval.aspx
Obama's ratings:
51% disapproval
43% approval

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... king_poll/

Friday, August 10, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 47% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 43%. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

The Annoyed Man wrote:We have a choice to make from among 4 possibilities:

1. Vote for Obama
2. Vote for Romney
3. Vote for a third party candidate
4. Stay home in protest

Here are the irrefutable consequences of each of those choices:

1. Helps things going the way they are, maybe faster.
2. Helps things going the way they are, maybe slower.
3. Helps change the direction things are going.
4. Helps nothing.

I would encourage you to do no less than vote your conscience, but I cannot let those kinds of comments pass without stating the hard truth for the sake of clarity. I value clarity above most other things, even when I don't like what that clarity reveals to me. So just be clear that your vote will do one of those 4 things listed above. Whatever you think your motives are, you cannot escape the clarity of those 4 choices, because your motives may inform your choices, but your choices will always have consequences that you may not have intended—and that's just the cold hard facts.

FYP