Romney 'Not Concerned About the Very Poor'

[danarhea]

GOP front-runner Mitt Romney said this morning that he's not concerned about the plight of the country's very poor because there are social safety nets that take care of them.

Now before anybody goes off the deep end and starts posting that Romney wants to screw over poor people, you need to take his comments in the context in which they were delivered. And in this context, I can say the following:

Romney may be talking hard right, but if elected, he is not going to destroy any of the social safety nets that are already in place, namely Social Security, Medicare, and SNAP (known as food stamps). However, I believe that he will also uphold Obamacare (Actually derived from Romneycare), and I have a problem with that. Otherwise, as I get to know him more, I am finding out that he is not the bogeyman that many are trying to make him out to be, and if elected, would take his direction from precedents already set by previous administrations on issues like Social Security. As far as Obamacare goes, that would stay, whether Obama or Romney is president. This is the way I see things, at this time, although my perception could change between now and election day.

I have already said this year that I would be voting third party, but if Romney is not batcrap insane (and it appears that he isn't), I may actually end up voting for him, just to get Obama out of office. Still, the stances he is taking in the primaries make the election an uphill climb for him, but once he has the nomination, he will most likely drift towards the center, in an attempt to pick up the moderates and Independents he needs to win.

Discussion?

Article is here.

 

[AdamT]

I think that Romney is a smart guy, and is not insane, which distinguishes him from the other GOP candidates. I wouldn't jump off a bridge if he was elected. The problem I have with him is that I really don't know what he'd do if he won. He seems to say and do whatever he thinks he needs to say or do to best promote the interests of Mitt Romney. Conservatives talk a lot about the alleged uncertainty problem that Obama creates, but I'm much more certain about what Obama would do than I am about what Mitt would do.

 

[grip]

I think Romney will win the Primaries because the money is behind him and he doesn't infuriate the extreme left enough to vote against him like a Gingrich.

I also believe unless Obama can really bring on the charm and pad his resume with more feel good platitude moves he'll lose to Romney in the general election. Obama has lost some of his core supporters for not being far enough left, especially on the corporate and war issues. Romney appeals to the middle, which could be the largest and fastest growing segment of new voters.

dana this thread has a duplicate in the "2012 US Presidential Election" section.

 

[Gill]

Now before anybody goes off the deep end and starts posting that Romney wants to screw over poor people, you need to take his comments in the context in which they were delivered. And in this context, I can say the following:

Romney may be talking hard right, but if elected, he is not going to destroy any of the social safety nets that are already in place, namely Social Security, Medicare, and SNAP (known as food stamps). However, I believe that he will also uphold Obamacare (Actually derived from Romneycare), and I have a problem with that. Otherwise, as I get to know him more, I am finding out that he is not the bogeyman that many are trying to make him out to be, and if elected, would take his direction from precedents already set by previous administrations on issues like Social Security. As far as Obamacare goes, that would stay, whether Obama or Romney is president. This is the way I see things, at this time, although my perception could change between now and election day.

I have already said this year that I would be voting third party, but if Romney is not batcrap insane (and it appears that he isn't), I may actually end up voting for him, just to get Obama out of office. Still, the stances he is taking in the primaries make the election an uphill climb for him, but once he has the nomination, he will most likely drift towards the center, in an attempt to pick up the moderates and Independents he needs to win.

Discussion?

Article is here.

I agree except for your comment on Obama Care. Romney has said repeatedly that he will begin work repealing it the first day he is in office.

 

[AdamT]

I agree except for your comment on Obama Care. Romney has said repeatedly that he will begin work repealing it the first day he is in office.

He said a lot of things ... before he did an about face and said just the opposite.

 

[Gill]

He said a lot of things ... before he did an about face and said just the opposite.

Sorta like Obama does ???

 

[AdamT]

Sorta like Obama does ???

Certainly Obama hasn't done it to the same degree, no.

 

[Gill]

Certainly Obama hasn't done it to the same degree, no.

Be careful, you might trip and fall wearing those blinders.

 

[AdamT]

Be careful, you might trip and fall wearing those blinders.

Thanks. I'll just stand in one place waiting for you to support your argument, if you can. opcorn2:

 

[danarhea]

I agree except for your comment on Obama Care. Romney has said repeatedly that he will begin work repealing it the first day he is in office.

People are not defined by what they say, but by what they do.

 

[Gill]

People are not defined by what they say, but by what they do.

Then I guess we'll have to elect him and see if he was telling the truth.

I'm betting he will do exactly that.

 

[jamesrage]

People are not defined by what they say, but by what they do.

Which is why I refuse to vote for Romney and Gingrich.

 

[danarhea]

Which is why I refuse to vote for Romney and Gingrich.

I understand exactly where you are coming from. But while Romney might not be the best guy here, he might end up being a better choice than Obama, and therefore someone you can hold your nose and vote for.

 

[00timh]

I understand exactly where you are coming from. But while Romney might not be the best guy here, he might end up being a better choice than Obama, and therefore someone you can hold your nose and vote for.

How has that been working since 06?

 

[danarhea]

How has that been working since 06?

Not too well, because too many Conservatives are not willing to hold their nose for only a small gain. They want it ALL now, and that's just not going to happen.

Small steps!!

 

[Jerry]

Now before anybody goes off the deep end and starts posting that Romney wants to screw over poor people, you need to take his comments in the context in which they were delivered. And in this context, I can say the following: Romney may be talking hard right, but if elected, he is not going to destroy any of the social safety nets that are already in place, namely Social Security, Medicare, and SNAP (known as food stamps). However, I believe that he will also uphold Obamacare (Actually derived from Romneycare), and I have a problem with that. Otherwise, as I get to know him more, I am finding out that he is not the bogeyman that many are trying to make him out to be, and if elected, would take his direction from precedents already set by previous administrations on issues like Social Security. As far as Obamacare goes, that would stay, whether Obama or Romney is president. This is the way I see things, at this time, although my perception could change between now and election day. I have already said this year that I would be voting third party, but if Romney is not batcrap insane (and it appears that he isn't), I may actually end up voting for him, just to get Obama out of office. Still, the stances he is taking in the primaries make the election an uphill climb for him, but once he has the nomination, he will most likely drift towards the center, in an attempt to pick up the moderates and Independents he needs to win. Discussion? Article is here.

I don't care about them either.

 

[barbarian_style]

Gingrich is a goner, he can stick around longer and have stupid fall from his yaw, but a goner. I also agree that Romney will continue to struggle for the front runner position. I think that the biggest wager Romney will have to still bet on is his VP choice and may actually determine whether he can secure those last undecided votes that may be the scale tipper, example: not Rick Santorum. Ron Paul could still run as an independent, extracting those votes away also.

As of right now I agree it is Obama's to win, we will just have to wait for the rest to develop to see if Romney can show some connection with his parties voters. If Mitt connects it could go his way, if not he will loose Ohio, Florida and possibly Wisconsin.

 

[johnny_rebson]

Gingrich is a goner, he can stick around longer and have stupid fall from his yaw, but a goner. I also agree that Romney will continue to struggle for the front runner position. I think that the biggest wager Romney will have to still bet on is his VP choice and may actually determine whether he can secure those last undecided votes that may be the scale tipper, example: not Rick Santorum. Ron Paul could still run as an independent, extracting those votes away also.

As of right now I agree it is Obama's to win, we will just have to wait for the rest to develop to see if Romney can show some connection with his parties voters....

I've read on a few websites that Gingrich might run as an independent in the general election.

 

[TurtleDude]

I've read on a few websites that Gingrich might run as an independent in the general election.

that would make him another butt hurt POS whiner Like Buchanan. Loses the nomination and proves he was a whining asshole all along. political vandalism at its worst. the good news it would be the end of that jerk as politically viable. Perot put Clinton in the WH because Perot had a hard on for GHWB but at least perot didn't have the dishonesty to run in the GOP primary first

 

[danarhea]

that would make him another butt hurt POS whiner Like Buchanan. Loses the nomination and proves he was a whining asshole all along. political vandalism at its worst. the good news it would be the end of that jerk as politically viable. Perot put Clinton in the WH because Perot had a hard on for GHWB but at least perot didn't have the dishonesty to run in the GOP primary first

I disagree. I voted for Buchanan in 2000, when people were saying he was batpoop crazy because of his stance on the border fence. Now, the border fence issue is pretty much mainstream. Buchanan was not a whiner. He believed in what he was doing, and issues were important to him, and through his candidacy brought important issues before the American people.