Mitt Romney and honesty

When Romney campaigned on those themes he was true to his word once he was elected governor. Now he is campaigning on different themes and I expect him to continue being true to his word if elected president. Yes, I could vote for him.

 

Initially, I was willing to give Romney some consideration. I was impressed with his marriage and personal family image.

When he ran that ad against Huckabee about meth dealers - leaving the impression that Huckabee was weaker on crime then him, I checked that out.

It was a half truth... YES, Huckabee reduced the time served from 70% to 50% due to the prison overpopulation, BUT.... time actually served in Arkansas would still be over twice the amount of time served in Romneyville...

I WAS NOT IMPRESSED! I lost all respect for that dishonest ad and I would NEVER vote for romney unless he was willing to apologize for that half truth ad.

Does that sound harsh?

 

I have always been suspicious of his timing and , in general, don't trust any politician who undergoes an epiphany on major issues, especially moral issues. I have issues with all the GOP candidates.

That being said, Im not at all sure he'll win the nomination and won't vote for him in the primary.(not sure who I'll vote for yet).

However, if he wins the nomination, he is preferrable to any democrat that is currently running and I won't sit it out or vote for a hopeless, as well as hapless, 3rd party candidate. That's the same as casting a vote for the democrat candidate. I won't do that under any circumstance.

 

SaturnNeptune said

No, I said what I meant to say. Why is it necessary to put words in my mouth?

Carpro said

I agree!

 

No you didn't miss anything. He IS the least desireable candidate on the Repubican side.

Just look at this and tell me anyone in their right minds would vote for someone that states this:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=46327


Oh, wait... I am sure someone will tell me that all the other candidates do it.. Does that make it right?

Jamie

 

SaturnNeptune said

You have an advantage over me in making decisions because you have the ability to judge other's motives. You apparently can read mine and Mitt Romney's. I don't know why Mitt Romney changed his position other than the reasons he has given. I do know that, as governor of Mass he governed consistently with the positions he took during the campaign. Based upon that, I think he would govern as president the way he is campaigning. How is that illogical?

 

Romney, like Ronald Reagan, changed his views on abortion. If you look at his record, he was very conservative.

Take a look at what Ann Coulter said about Romney:

Liberals claim to be enraged at Romney for being a "flip-flopper." I've looked and looked, and the only issue I can find that Romney has "flipped" on is abortion. When running for office in Massachusetts -- or, for short, "the Soviet Union" -- Romney said that Massachusetts was a pro-choice state and that he would not seek to change laws on abortion.

Romney's first race was against Sen. Teddy Kennedy -- whom he came closer to beating than any Republican ever had. If Romney needed to quote "The Communist Manifesto" to take out that corpulent drunk, all men of good will would owe him a debt of gratitude.

Even when Romney was claiming to support Roe v. Wade, he won the endorsement of Massachusetts Citizens for Life -- a group I trust more than the editorial board of The New York Times. Romney's Democratic opponents always won the endorsements of the very same pro-choice groups now attacking him as a "flip-flopper."

After his term as governor, NARAL Pro-Choice America assailed Romney, saying: "(A)s governor he initially expressed pro-choice beliefs but had a generally anti-choice record. His position on choice has changed. His position is now anti-choice."

Pro-abortion groups like the Republican Majority for Choice -- the evil doppelganger to my own group, Democratic Majority for Life -- are now running videos attacking Romney for "flip-flopping" on abortion.

Of all the Republican candidates for president, Romney and Rudy Giuliani are the only ones who had to be elected in pro-choice districts. Romney governed as a pro-lifer and has been viciously attacked by pro-abortion groups.

By contrast, Giuliani cleverly avoids the heinous "flip-flopper" label by continuing to embrace baby-killing. (Rudy flip-flops only on trivial matters like illegal immigration and his own marital vows.)

And, of course, Romney is a Mormon. Even a loser Mormon like Sen. Harry Reid claims to be pro-life. So having a candidate with a wacky religion isn't all bad.

At worst, Romney will turn out to be a moderate Republican -- a high-IQ, articulate, moral, wildly successful, moderate Republican. Of the top five Republican candidates for president, Romney is the only one who hasn't dumped his first wife (as well as the second, in the case of Giuliani) -- except Huckabee. And unlike Huckabee, Romney doesn't have a son who hanged a dog at summer camp. So there won't be any intern issues and there won't be any Billy Carter issues.

It's also possible that Romney will turn out to be a conservative Republican -- at least more conservative than he was as governor of Massachusetts. Whatever problems Romney's Mormonism gives voters, remember: Bill Clinton came in third in heavily Mormon Utah in 1992.