Hold Your Nose .. And Vote For Romney

Talk about resonating with the American people, this pretty much nails it: Hold Your Nose .. And Vote For Romney

And I totally get this, as though Romney does nothing for me, Obama's obvious intention to do harm to America, including race-baiting a race war in America, makes him truly damn scarier.

We didn't get much of a choice again this election, as only liberal and to the left of liberal and conservative and to the right of conservative fielded presidential candidates, so, as the article states, the great majority of Americans will have to hold their nose once again when they vote.

It's pretty clear, though, that between the two leaders of the pack, one of whom will become President, one choice stinks worse than the other.

Ontologuy said:

Talk about resonating with the American people, this pretty much nails it: Hold Your Nose .. And Vote For Romney

And I totally get this, as though Romney does nothing for me, Obama's obvious intention to do harm to America....

Click to expand...

No need to read past that point. :roll:

AdamT said:

No need to read past that point. :roll:

Click to expand...

True, if you're an MCI Obama-supporter, aversion conditioning being what it is.

But for the rest of us not so intellectually compromised, the facts, as scary as they may be, are of great value to American citizens in making an informed choice.

Ontologuy said:

Talk about resonating with the American people, this pretty much nails it: Hold Your Nose .. And Vote For Romney

And I totally get this, as though Romney does nothing for me, Obama's obvious intention to do harm to America

Click to expand...

stopped reading here. i posted this to aid you in crafting more effective threads in the future.

Ontologuy said:

True, if you're an MCI Obama-supporter, aversion conditioning being what it is.

But for the rest of us not so intellectually compromised, the facts, as scary as they may be, are of great value to American citizens in making an informed choice.

Click to expand...

Please get back to me when you begin using facts to make that informed choice.

You know, "hold your nose" will be a phrase meant for every election cycle. No matter what a large number of people are dissatisfied. If you get two candidates that supremely disagree about everything to profound degrees, you'll still get the same amount (if not more) of disgust at having to "hold their nose and vote for ______." Instead of it being "no choice" you get "too much choice, not enough middle ground."

In summary: Please vote, but spare us the platitudes.

Oh heavens! This? Again? In every cycle since I can remember, it has been proclaimed, sometimes more than others, that there is no choice and voters should "hold their nose" for one candidate or the other. Please. No candidate is perfect and some voters have very narrow, not mainstream, ideas of what they want in a president so some people groan and complain, loudly, like the writer in the link.

When a candidate runs for president, they have to consider the entire electorate and so no one point of view or narrow swath will be completely happy. 350 million people is a lot to cater to. Then, one's particular desire is not met. Also, in this day and age, really good people will not run because they don't want to have the minutiae of their lives examined and shredded for the pleasure of their opponent and then you have potential candidates weighing their chances and sitting out because they don't want to waste their shot.

In short, we get what circumstances give us. Get over it. Politics is not "Goldilocks and the Three Bears".

I echo those sentiments...

I am a huge Romney supporter. He changed my outlook on politics entirely when he ran for office in MA and then took over and did exactly what he said he would, turned MA fiscal crisis around, got the Big Dig straightened out, etc. He said he would bring a business like aproach and reach across the aisle to get things done rather than play politics... and it's just what he did... and I hope everyone gets the chance to see him do it as president...

However, with that said... last election cycle, I wrote in Romney as a protest vote... I've voted for Nader twice before that... I am a big believer in the right and the ability to vote for whoever someone wants to...

This election is different for me. I would've voted whatever opposition party candidate had the best chance to get Obama out of office, because he is the exact opposite of what I want for this country.

All Obama does is play politics, deliver empty rhetoric, make promises he doesn't even have the ability to keep, etc. Instead of working with people, he scapegoats. Instead of collaborating, he brings in people he sees eye to eye with and then tries to cram their plan down everyone else's throats. When his act doesn't work, he points fingers, attempts to lay blame, and throws people under the bus. The buck stops with me, but it's the Republicans fault?

As Romney's new ad suggests, that's not leadership... real leaders find a way... and that's just what Romney's done... accomplishing real change in MA with an 85% opposition party legislature...

I don't expect everyone to feel as strongly as I do about Romney's ability to get things done, until they see it proven before their eyes.

I do expect though, that people should recognize how bad Obama has been as a president... and the great cost it will be leaving him in office for another 4 years, just for the vanity of voting for a 3rd party candidate... because, that's all it will be at this point, vanity...

So, I also ask people to put the interests of their country ahead of their own personal vanity... Everyone of you who say you oppose Obama recognize that Romney is by far the more preferable of the 2 major party candidates... and since there is no major 3rd party candidate in this election, it has to be this way...

If you recognize the fact that Romney is far preferable to Obama, I implore you to do as was suggested, and hold your nose and vote for Romney, and give him the chance to prove you wrong about your percieved negatives of him...

Ontologuy said:

Talk about resonating with the American people, this pretty much nails it: Hold Your Nose .. And Vote For Romney

And I totally get this, as though Romney does nothing for me, Obama's obvious intention to do harm to America, including race-baiting a race war in America, makes him truly damn scarier.

We didn't get much of a choice again this election, as only liberal and to the left of liberal and conservative and to the right of conservative fielded presidential candidates, so, as the article states, the great majority of Americans will have to hold their nose once again when they vote.

It's pretty clear, though, that between the two leaders of the pack, one of whom will become President, one choice stinks worse than the other.

Click to expand...

Wow.. yet ANOTHER thread about how everyone should vote for the lesser of two evils. It's an all out "assault on third party day" here at DP.

poweRob said:

Wow.. yet ANOTHER thread about how everyone should vote for the lesser of two evils. It's an all out "assault on third party day" here at DP.

Click to expand...

Because it's going to be a close election and third party's will do nothing but hurt Obama or Mitt. Go figure?

Ontologuy said:

Talk about resonating with the American people, this pretty much nails it: Hold Your Nose .. And Vote For Romney

And I totally get this, as though Romney does nothing for me, Obama's obvious intention to do harm to America, including race-baiting a race war in America, makes him truly damn scarier.

We didn't get much of a choice again this election, as only liberal and to the left of liberal and conservative and to the right of conservative fielded presidential candidates, so, as the article states, the great majority of Americans will have to hold their nose once again when they vote.

It's pretty clear, though, that between the two leaders of the pack, one of whom will become President, one choice stinks worse than the other.

Click to expand...

good blog post.

Gina said:

In short, we get what circumstances give us. Get over it. Politics is not "Goldilocks and the Three Bears".

Click to expand...

I agree...

only... in that too many people are looking for the perfect candidate, and trying to be too choosy... there aren't 3 chairs, 3 beds, and 3 bowls of soup here...

at this point it's Romney or Obama, with no other candidate polling even close to 1%...

Stop acting like Goldielocks... Romney is just fine as a candidate...

IndepCentristMA said:

I agree...

only... in that too many people are looking for the perfect candidate, and trying to be too choosy... there aren't 3 chairs, 3 beds, and 3 bowls of soup here...

at this point it's Romney or Obama, with no other candidate polling even close to 1%...

Stop acting like Goldielocks... Romney is just fine as a candidate...

Click to expand...

In Goldilocks and the 3 Bears, one bowl of porridge was too cold and another too hot.

In this race Obama is too liberal....and Romney is too liberal.

It's amazing what you can do with an Etch-A-Sketch.

Ontologuy said:

Talk about resonating with the American people, this pretty much nails it: Hold Your Nose .. And Vote For Romney

And I totally get this, as though Romney does nothing for me, Obama's obvious intention to do harm to America, including race-baiting a race war in America, makes him truly damn scarier.

We didn't get much of a choice again this election, as only liberal and to the left of liberal and conservative and to the right of conservative fielded presidential candidates, so, as the article states, the great majority of Americans will have to hold their nose once again when they vote.

It's pretty clear, though, that between the two leaders of the pack, one of whom will become President, one choice stinks worse than the other.

Click to expand...

I see you like playing the race card.

johnny_rebson said:

In Goldilocks and the 3 Bears, one bowl of porridge was too cold and another too hot.

In this race Obama is too liberal....and Romney is too liberal.

It's amazing what you can do with an Etch-A-Sketch.

Click to expand...

zzzzz same tired rhetoric... maybe Obama is your candidate afterall...

Fiddytree said:

You know, "hold your nose" will be a phrase meant for every election cycle. No matter what a large number of people are dissatisfied. If you get two candidates that supremely disagree about everything to profound degrees, you'll still get the same amount (if not more) of disgust at having to "hold their nose and vote for ______." Instead of it being "no choice" you get "too much choice, not enough middle ground."

In summary: Please vote, but spare us the platitudes.

Click to expand...

Holding one's nose implies both candidates stink to a degree.

However, liberals don't hold their nose when they vote for Obama and conservatives don't hold their nose when they vote for Romney.

It's centrists, where the great majority of Americans reside, who historically have had to hold their nose and vote for one extreme or the other.

That's pretty much the simplicity of it.

This election, Obama is the stinker of the two, therefore the thread's title.

Gina said:

Oh heavens! This? Again? In every cycle since I can remember, it has been proclaimed, sometimes more than others, that there is no choice and voters should "hold their nose" for one candidate or the other. Please. No candidate is perfect and some voters have very narrow, not mainstream, ideas of what they want in a president so some people groan and complain, loudly, like the writer in the link.

When a candidate runs for president, they have to consider the entire electorate and so no one point of view or narrow swath will be completely happy. 350 million people is a lot to cater to. Then, one's particular desire is not met. Also, in this day and age, really good people will not run because they don't want to have the minutiae of their lives examined and shredded for the pleasure of their opponent and then you have potential candidates weighing their chances and sitting out because they don't want to waste their shot.

In short, we get what circumstances give us. Get over it. Politics is not "Goldilocks and the Three Bears".

Click to expand...

In every election cycle since you can remember, nose-holding was required to cast a vote for President because the great majority of the people, centrists, had no candidate to represent them.

This year is no different.

Roughly 10% of the population is liberal with about the same percent conservative, with about 5% totaling left of liberal and right of conservative. That means roughly 75% of America, the "silent majority" has been silently holding their nose in the voting booth for like forever.

When a liberal and conservative candidate runs for President, they have to consider the base from which most of their campaign funds will eminate. They don't really consider the great majority at the center, and only touch a bit on mainstream philosophy if they think it won't harm their liberal or conservative money-base. This year, Romney took more chances in that regard.

But no one's being fooled. If elected Obama will do liberal things and Romney, most certainly, will do conservative things.

The great majority of Americans, centrists, know this and that stinks for them.

This election, Obama is clearly the stinker of the two.

Thus the link pretty much sums it up for the great majority of Americans this election.

poweRob said:

Wow.. yet ANOTHER thread about how everyone should vote for the lesser of two evils. It's an all out "assault on third party day" here at DP.

Click to expand...

All third parties on the ballot this year orient to the left of liberal, the right of conservative or are both liberal and conservative at the same time (Libertarian).

Thus third parties are just as stinky as the Dems and the Repubs to the great majority of voters: centrists.

Though clearly all parties out there, absent a centrist party, are evils in the mind of centrists, Romney is the lessest choice, as either Obama or Romney will be elected for a fact, with the only real choice being to decide which of the two it will be, and that clearly should be Romney.

We use "lesser" instead of "lessest" (to play with a made-up word for "least" imply three or more choices) because there really are only two choices worth comparing, Obama and Romney, the only two who have a chance to get elected.

Thus "lesser" is the proper term here.

Blackdog said:

Because it's going to be a close election and third party's will do nothing but hurt Obama or Mitt. Go figure?

Click to expand...

How can a vote FOR one person hurt another person? Does the latter person have some kind of divine right to that vote?

pbrauer said:

I see you like playing the race card.

Click to expand...

Accurately pointing out that Obama is most certainly race-baiting is not "playing the race card". :roll:

Obama is doing what he's doing and what he's doing is obvious: race-baiting.

But, I would expect a liberal to behave as if reality isn't reality and to fantasize that those who are calling Obama on his race-baiting are "playing the race card".

Typical.

Ontologuy said:

All third parties on the ballot this year orient to the left of liberal, the right of conservative or are both liberal and conservative at the same time (Libertarian).

Thus third parties are just as stinky as the Dems and the Repubs to the great majority of voters: centrists.

Though clearly all parties out there, absent a centrist party, are evils in the mind of centrists, Romney is the lessest choice, as either Obama or Romney will be elected for a fact, with the only real choice being to decide which of the two it will be, and that clearly should be Romney.

We use "lesser" instead of "lessest" (to play with a made-up word for "least" imply three or more choices) because there really are only two choices worth comparing, Obama and Romney, the only two who have a chance to get elected.

Thus "lesser" is the proper term here.

Click to expand...

I don't buy into your philosophy that the middle is the appropriate answer.

poweRob said:

How can a vote FOR one person hurt another person? Does the latter person have some kind of divine right to that vote?

Click to expand...

"A vote" won't. But those "a vote"s add up.

In 1992, those votes for Perot killed Vice President Bush .. and in 2000 those votes for the Greens gored Gore.

Since no stinky third party has a chance and only a stinky Repub or a really stinky Dem will get elected, it's possible that the sum of votes that might have been cast for Romney, the lesser of the two evils, might get cast for his logical alternative third party more than the sum of votes that might have been cast for Obama get cast for his logical third party alternative, and that could give race-baiting America-killing Obama a really slim victory.

It's not a matter of who has a divine right to any votes.

It's a matter of getting Obama out of office before he kills America.

Thus those who are considering a third party alternative to Romney really need to think twice about doing so, and stick with Romney.

Those who are considering a third party alternative to Obama .. yeah, go ahead, sounds good to me.

Ontologuy said:

Holding one's nose implies both candidates stink to a degree.

However, liberals don't hold their nose when they vote for Obama and conservatives don't hold their nose when they vote for Romney.

It's centrists, where the great majority of Americans reside, who historically have had to hold their nose and vote for one extreme or the other.

That's pretty much the simplicity of it.

This election, Obama is the stinker of the two, therefore the thread's title.

Click to expand...

Centrists don't break into such easy generalizations. We are also not being presented with extremes in this election. One's a moderate, and the other one is a fairly strident liberal who is forced to govern a tish more moderately.

Furthermore, I'm not completely satisfied with Romney, but I am quite content. No holding of the nose. It will be a rare feat for myself to be almost completely taken in by a candidate.

poweRob said:

I don't buy into your philosophy that the middle is the appropriate answer.

Click to expand...

Well, first of all, literally, I agree with you, as the middle isn't the appropriate answer this year simply because there is no centrist candidate/party on the ballot this year.

But the great majority of Americans are bunched up there in the middle patiently waiting for a centrist candidate to emerge .. and Romney's "moderate" ploy this year is a sad substitute for that.

Nevertheless, Obama is clearly the eviler of the two .. and all centrists would do well to vote for Romney simply to get Obama out of office before he kills our country.

Still, I get what you're really saying: you, a liberal, want Obama to win, so you deny the understandable preference by the great majority of Americans for a centrist candidate.

Ontologuy said:

Well, first of all, literally, I agree with you, as the middle isn't the appropriate answer this year simply because there is no centrist candidate/party on the ballot this year.

But the great majority of Americans are bunched up there in the middle patiently waiting for a centrist candidate to emerge .. and Romney's "moderate" ploy this year is a sad substitute for that.

Nevertheless, Obama is clearly the eviler of the two .. and all centrists would do well to vote for Romney simply to get Obama out of office before he kills our country.

Still, I get what you're really saying: you, a liberal, want Obama to win, so you deny the understandable preference by the great majority of Americans for a centrist candidate.

Click to expand...

I disagree in that people would much rather vote for a Libertarian or a Green but we've been cowed into this two party do or die mentality.