• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Why Romney is NOT electable

Grimm dear: I don't know why - but for some reason - and correct me if I'm wrong, by all means - but for some reason I think you don't like Romney.

Maybe it's the multi posts and complete focus on him at the moment - anything else on your mind lately that you'd like to share?
 
Yes, don't vote for Mitt Romeny! :lol:

Aunt Spiker said:
Grimm dear: I don't know why - but for some reason - and correct me if I'm wrong, by all means - but for some reason I think you don't like Romney.

Maybe it's the multi posts and complete focus on him at the moment - anything else on your mind lately that you'd like to share?
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
So you think that because I said 30% vote, and I was wrong by 20%, that invalidates my argument?

How?
Click to expand...

No, I think that you making unfounded claims means that without proof I am not taking your word for anything. You have not been offering any proof. Since you made 3 claims in your OP to back up your position, and all 3 claims are false, then your chain of logic is clearly faulty. Time to start again with an argument based on actual facts.

By the way, if I owe you 55 bucks, and pay you 30 and say that is close enough, you going to sit still for it? You going to loan me money again?
 
Peter Grimm said:
Wow you really don't understand!!

You think like a computer. It's interesting actually. You really don't comprehend the big picture at all.
Click to expand...

Let me explain something to you son, since I am one of the more senior members on this forum.

If REDRESS and THE TURTLE agree on something and their agreement involves slapping your arguments around, its pretty much Iron clad truth your posts aren't making sense.

Its sort of like someone getting thrashed by both the militant IRA and the Ulster Defense League in Belfast
 
TurtleDude said:
Let me explain something to you son, since I am one of the more senior members on this forum.

If REDRESS and THE TURTLE agree on something and their agreement involves slapping your arguments around, its pretty much Iron clad truth your posts aren't making sense.

Its sort of like someone getting thrashed by both the militant IRA and the Ulster Defense League in Belfast
Click to expand...

I know. I feel dirty right now.
 
Yeah, you clearly don't get along at all... :roll:

TurtleDude said:
Let me explain something to you son, since I am one of the more senior members on this forum.

If REDRESS and THE TURTLE agree on something and their agreement involves slapping your arguments around, its pretty much Iron clad truth your posts aren't making sense.

Its sort of like someone getting thrashed by both the militant IRA and the Ulster Defense League in Belfast
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
Polls are one thing... here is why you can't go by robo-polls that are basically someone calling you at home asking for your opinion.

You don't win an election by winning independents and moderates. Those people don't vote anyway. They stay home.

You win an election by getting your base to turn out.

Only like 30% of Americans vote. The winner is the one that fires up his base.
Click to expand...
Here is some assistance for you, from Townhall.

7 Reasons Why Mitt Romney's Electability Is A Myth - John Hawkins - Townhall Conservative
 
Let's try again.


You win an election by getting people to turn out. <--- Premise

The American people are ambivalent about elections. Many will not turn out. <---- Premise

Hard-liners are more likely to turn out than moderates <----- Premise


Party should elect candidate that appeals to hard-liners <---- Conclusion
 
Peter Grimm said:
Yeah, you clearly don't get along at all... :roll:
Click to expand...

He did not say we do not get along(we do more often than not). He said we do not agree, which is 95 % true. Well, maybe 90 %. There are very few things we agree on, and we will be voting for different candidates in November.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Polls are one thing... here is why you can't go by robo-polls that are basically someone calling you at home asking for your opinion.

You don't win an election by winning independents and moderates. Those people don't vote anyway. They stay home.

You win an election by getting your base to turn out.

Only like 30% of Americans vote. The winner is the one that fires up his base.
Click to expand...

You are ABSOLUTELY correct....which is why the GOP needs to nominate one of the completely wacko right-wingers like Santorum, Perry or Gingrich!
 
Peter Grimm said:
Let's try again.


You win an election by getting people to turn out. <--- Premise

The American people are ambivalent about elections. Many will not turn out. <---- Premise

Hard-liners are more likely to turn out than moderates <----- Premise


Party should elect candidate that appeals to hard-liners <---- Conclusion
Click to expand...

All 3 premises are false.

You win an election by getting those who turn out to vote for you.

Ambivelant is the exact wrong word to describe voters.

Moderates are just as likely to turn out as the party faithful. They are also the ones who will decide the election. There is a reason why Obama polls worse against Romney than any other candidate. There is a reason why candidates run to the party extreme during primaries, and run to the center in a general election.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Yeah, you clearly don't get along at all... :roll:
Click to expand...

I have forgotten more about politics than you will ever learn. and I suspect that would be true with Redress.

true believers have another term when it comes to elective politics and elections

LOSER
 
Turtle,

If Romney defeats Ron Paul in the primaries, should Libertarians vote for Romney or Gary Johnson in November?
 
Some people will turn out for some candidates and not turn out for others. Many conservatives will stay home if Romeny is the nominee, who otherwise would have gone to vote.

If half of Americans don't think it's worth their time to vote, what word other than "ambivalent" would describe the American electorate? Only 6% of Americans even know Mitt Romeny's real first name. People simply don't know or care much about politics.

Moderates are not just as likely to turn out as the "faithful." The "faithful" turn out precisely because they are "faithful."

At the end of the day, you have a group of Americans who care about politics, and a group who don't. The ones who do care are the ones who will vote, more or less. So to get a good turnout, have someone in there who appeals to the Americans who care.

Redress said:
All 3 premises are false.

You win an election by getting those who turn out to vote for you.

Ambivelant is the exact wrong word to describe voters.

Moderates are just as likely to turn out as the party faithful. They are also the ones who will decide the election. There is a reason why Obama polls worse against Romney than any other candidate. There is a reason why candidates run to the party extreme during primaries, and run to the center in a general election.
Click to expand...
 
johnny_rebson said:
Turtle,

If Romney defeats Ron Paul in the primaries, should Libertarians vote for Romney or Gary Johnson in November?
Click to expand...

You are making a common mistake in reading too much in how one labels themselves here. I do not think TD is a member of the Libertarian party. His political beliefs closest match the general libertarian ideal.
 
You mad? I think you just lost your cool.

TurtleDude said:
I have forgotten more about politics than you will ever learn. and I suspect that would be true with Redress.

true believers have another term when it comes to elective politics and elections

LOSER
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
Some people will turn out for some candidates and not turn out for others. Many conservatives will stay home if Romeny is the nominee, who otherwise would have gone to vote.

If half of Americans don't think it's worth their time to vote, what word other than "ambivalent" would describe the American electorate? Only 6% of Americans even know Mitt Romeny's real first name. People simply don't know or care much about politics.

Moderates are not just as likely to turn out as the "faithful." The "faithful" turn out precisely because they are "faithful."

At the end of the day, you have a group of Americans who care about politics, and a group who don't. The ones who do care are the ones who will vote, more or less. So to get a good turnout, have someone in there who appeals to the Americans who care.
Click to expand...

No doubt Republicans will turn out a higher percentage than independents, but independents outnuber them by far.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Some people will turn out for some candidates and not turn out for others. Many conservatives will stay home if Romeny is the nominee, who otherwise would have gone to vote.

If half of Americans don't think it's worth their time to vote, what word other than "ambivalent" would describe the American electorate? Only 6% of Americans even know Mitt Romeny's real first name. People simply don't know or care much about politics.

Moderates are not just as likely to turn out as the "faithful." The "faithful" turn out precisely because they are "faithful."

At the end of the day, you have a group of Americans who care about politics, and a group who don't. The ones who do care are the ones who will vote, more or less. So to get a good turnout, have someone in there who appeals to the Americans who care.
Click to expand...

Some will stay home based on the choice no matter who is chosen. But, the popular choice will most likely still have the best chance to win in November. That is what it means to be the popular choice. If Paul won, I suspect republican turnout would be a much larger problem, and if Santorum won, moderate republican turnout would be trouble, not to mention Santorum would get killed by the moderate/independent voters. All the information we have so far suggests Romney is far and away the most likely to beat Obama in November. As a liberal, he is the one I fear the most.
 
Redress said:
Some will stay home based on the choice no matter who is chosen. But, the popular choice will most likely still have the best chance to win in November. That is what it means to be the popular choice. If Paul won, I suspect republican turnout would be a much larger problem, and if Santorum won, moderate republican turnout would be trouble, not to mention Santorum would get killed by the moderate/independent voters. All the information we have so far suggests Romney is far and away the most likely to beat Obama in November. As a liberal, he is the one I fear the most.
Click to expand...

If your logic is accurate, why didn't McCain defeat Obama in the last presidential election?

I'll tell you why McCain lost, because many conservatives stayed home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom