• 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.

Majority of Conservatives See Romney as "Acceptable"

donsutherland1 said:
In numerous threads and also on other websites, the following two narratives have frequently surfaced:

1. Mitt Romney is not an acceptable candidate for conservatives
2. Ron Paul is a serious contender for the nomination

Today, Gallup released polling data that turned those narratives on their head. The data revealed that Governor Romney enjoys support among Republicans who identify themselves as conservatives. It also revealed that Ron Paul's support is limited.

Gallup revealed:

Mitt Romney is the now the only candidate that a majority of conservative and moderate/liberal Republicans nationwide see as an "acceptable" GOP nominee for president. Conservative Republicans are more likely to say Romney would be an acceptable nominee than either Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum.

Majority of Conservatives See Romney as "Acceptable"

Romney was seen as being acceptable by 59% of conservatives and 59% of moderates/liberals. Gingrich and Santorum also did well among conservatives but had weak showings with moderates/liberals. Paul, on the other hand, was seen as acceptable by just 25% of conservatives and 35% of moderates/liberals.

The bottom line is that this poll offers additional evidence that Mitt Romney is the favorite to secure the Republican nomination (high support by conservatives and moderates/liberals). Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich are in a second tier (high support among conservatives but low support among moderates/liberals). The remaining candidates, including Ron Paul, are in a third tier (low support among conservatives and moderates/liberals).
Click to expand...
And the other day he said what he did at Bain Capital is the same as what Obama did with GM.
 
American said:
And the other day he said what he did at Bain Capital is the same as what Obama did with GM.
Click to expand...

Attempt to pick winners and losers in the market? Yeah, essentially. Only when private investment companies do that, and miss, its their money that they lose not tax payer money like in the case of Solindra. In the case of Bain, they fill pivitol role in the economy by providing funds to allow companies, that are worthy of getting those funds based on the potential market for the good/service, to start up and have a go at it. On the flip side, the Government's job is not to attempt to provide funds to companies to try and get them to grow, especially based not on the potential market for the goods and service but rather an attempt to push a political agenda into the market forcefully.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
This poll is great news, sometimes I am worried by the nutjobs that would rather see 4 more years than Romney, thank God they are an extreme minority.
Click to expand...

Not as small a group as you'd like to think, and definitely enough to keep Romney out of the White House.
 
Zyphlin said:
Attempt to pick winners and losers in the market? Yeah, essentially. Only when private investment companies do that, and miss, its their money that they lose not tax payer money like in the case of Solindra. In the case of Bain, they fill pivitol role in the economy by providing funds to allow companies, that are worthy of getting those funds based on the potential market for the good/service, to start up and have a go at it. On the flip side, the Government's job is not to attempt to provide funds to companies to try and get them to grow, especially based not on the potential market for the goods and service but rather an attempt to push a political agenda into the market forcefully.
Click to expand...

Or in other words, a company like Bain's role is to make money for Bain, regardless of how it affects the companies and employees it targets, while the government's role is to look after the best interests of the country as a whole.
 
AdamT said:
Or in other words, a company like Bain's role is to make money for Bain, regardless of how it affects the companies and employees it targets, while the government's role is to look after the best interests of the President's supporters.
Click to expand...

Fixed it for ya.
 
AdamT said:
I have no problem with that. The American people should support their president.
Click to expand...

Especially those that raise millions of dollars for his reelection, eh?

House Republicans have released emails related to solar panel maker Solyndra which got $535 million in government loan guarantees and then went bankrupt. Republicans say the emails show an Obama campaign bundler used his influence at the White House to make the loan happen.
Click to expand...
 
Gill said:
There you go again.... Media Matters is not an acceptable source of information. The link is nothing but their opinion and we all know which direction that leans.

Pitiful.
Click to expand...

Actually the link provides the text and dates of the actual e-mails that form the basis of your accusation, establishing that they were written AFTER the loans were already made.
 
AdamT said:
Actually the link provides the text and dates of the actual e-mails that form the basis of your accusation, establishing that they were written AFTER the loans were already made.
Click to expand...
He does have a valid point. Media Matters is a left leaning news source. Wouldn't put it past them to alter documents. If you can find a different source of this, I think it would prove your point better. As it is, it looks as though Media Matters is the only one carrying it. That says biased coverage to me and a lot of other people, whatever their lean.
 
MarineTpartier said:
He does have a valid point. Media Matters is a left leaning news source. Wouldn't put it past them to alter documents. If you can find a different source of this, I think it would prove your point better. As it is, it looks as though Media Matters is the only one carrying it. That says biased coverage to me and a lot of other people, whatever their lean.
Click to expand...

You understand that you are making a classic ad hominem argument, right? Media Matters is a left leaning site -- that is true. But that doesn't automatically invalidate everything that they say. In this case, if you actually looked at the linked page, it included a direct quotations from the Wall Street Journal -- a right leaning site -- which found that there was no support for the claim.

A top Obama fund-raiser with ties to Solyndra LLC asked the president to crack down on Chinese competitors of the solar-panel maker but avoided lobbying directly for the company, newly released emails show.

George Kaiser's family foundation owned a 36% stake in Solyndra, which declared bankruptcy in September and closed operations.

The emails released by House lawmakers offered the first glimpse of Mr. Kaiser's actions that might have helped Solyndra. But they don't offer evidence that would support Republican allegations that politics influenced the Department of Energy's decision to give Solyndra a $535 million loan guarantee. [Wall Street Journal, 11/10/11]
Click to expand...
 
Zyphlin said:
Attempt to pick winners and losers in the market? Yeah, essentially. Only when private investment companies do that, and miss, its their money that they lose not tax payer money like in the case of Solindra. In the case of Bain, they fill pivitol role in the economy by providing funds to allow companies, that are worthy of getting those funds based on the potential market for the good/service, to start up and have a go at it. On the flip side, the Government's job is not to attempt to provide funds to companies to try and get them to grow, especially based not on the potential market for the goods and service but rather an attempt to push a political agenda into the market forcefully.
Click to expand...
His comparison was as politically stupid as Newt attacking him for being a capitalist. It's sounded like he was agreeing with Obama. Maybe he'll change parties and have a Democrat Primary with Obama. :lol:
 
American said:
His comparison was as politically stupid as Newt attacking him for being a capitalist. It's sounded like he was agreeing with Obama. Maybe he'll change parties and have a Democrat Primary with Obama. :lol:
Click to expand...

Didn't you get the message? Republicans aren't supposed to support capitalism any more!

Conservatives should not be defending capitalism. They should be defending economic freedom. And there is a difference. The word capitalism was created by Karl Marx to demonize those people who make a profit. We’ve always talked about the free enterprise system or economic freedom. Suddenly, they’re trying to defend something that has only 18 percent support.

--Frank Luntz
Click to expand...

 
Frank Luntz - smart man.

Defending the indefensible...
 
donsutherland1 said:
In numerous threads and also on other websites, the following two narratives have frequently surfaced:

1. Mitt Romney is not an acceptable candidate for conservatives
2. Ron Paul is a serious contender for the nomination

Today, Gallup released polling data that turned those narratives on their head. The data revealed that Governor Romney enjoys support among Republicans who identify themselves as conservatives. It also revealed that Ron Paul's support is limited.

Gallup revealed:

Mitt Romney is the now the only candidate that a majority of conservative and moderate/liberal Republicans nationwide see as an "acceptable" GOP nominee for president. Conservative Republicans are more likely to say Romney would be an acceptable nominee than either Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum.

Majority of Conservatives See Romney as "Acceptable"

Romney was seen as being acceptable by 59% of conservatives and 59% of moderates/liberals. Gingrich and Santorum also did well among conservatives but had weak showings with moderates/liberals. Paul, on the other hand, was seen as acceptable by just 25% of conservatives and 35% of moderates/liberals.

The bottom line is that this poll offers additional evidence that Mitt Romney is the favorite to secure the Republican nomination (high support by conservatives and moderates/liberals). Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich are in a second tier (high support among conservatives but low support among moderates/liberals). The remaining candidates, including Ron Paul, are in a third tier (low support among conservatives and moderates/liberals).
Click to expand...


I cannot speak for a "majority" of conservatives, but as a conservative myself I can promise you that I will not be voting for Mitt Romeny if he is our candidate. All one really has to do is take a look at his record, and it is clear that he is not conservative.

I am sure many will "settle" for Mitt Romney. I see this as weakness. I am sure there are many who will tag along like sheep. I for one believe in principle, and my principles tell me that Mitt Romney is nowhere near a conservative candidate for president.
 
I'm voting for Paul but Romney would be one of the least offensive of the rest. Romney is like going to Baskin Robbins and asking for Butter Pecan and being told that all there is left is vanilla.
 
MarineTpartier said:
I agree. Romney is almost unstoppable now. The guy has WAY too much money to be silenced. The guy's been running forever, raising money forever, so he should be this way. It also seems like the other candidates have surrendered. They go after each other, fighting for the scraps off of Romney's table (stole that line from Braveheart, replace Romney with Longshanks). As long as he doesn't do anything stupid like, maybe, saying he enjoys firing people. Romney should just shut his mouth, offer no opinions, and not give any more ammo to the Dems. I believe once South Carolina is over, he will do that. At least, he should do that. The only thing that can open the door is if he doesn't do well in New Hamshire or loses South Carolina. By doing well, I mean he needs to blow everyone out of the water, especially Santorum. Paul isn't a threat, so he can do as well as he wants.

I say all this as someone who isn't a fan of Romney. If he wins the nom, of course I will vote for him over Hussein. But, I'm not voting for him to be the nominee.
Click to expand...

Romney's cauffers just got deeper. According to MSNBC.com, Romney now has some big private equity firms contributors behind him. Two, of which, are the infamous Koch Brothers. But this will only go to paint Romney more as a "Wall Street" guy, completely out of touch with "main street".

He may think he just got big money endorsers to compete with President Obama's estimated $1 billion campaign war chest, but all Romeny's backer have done is confirm what the middle-class already knows - that he's a Wall Street capitalist.

So, of course conservatives like him. If he wins the presidency, he'll ensure tax laws at the very least continue to be sked their way including the high odds of making the Bush tax cuts permanent not to mention bring more lobbyinst to K-Street.

American said:
His comparison was as politically stupid as Newt attacking him for being a capitalist. It's sounded like he was agreeing with Obama. Maybe he'll change parties and have a Democrat Primary with Obama. :lol:
Click to expand...


AdamT said:
Didn't you get the message? Republicans aren't supposed to support capitalism any more!

Conservatives should not be defending capitalism. They should be defending economic freedom. And there is a difference. The word capitalism was created by Karl Marx to demonize those people who make a profit. We’ve always talked about the free enterprise system or economic freedom. Suddenly, they’re trying to defend something that has only 18 percent support.

--Frank Luntz
Click to expand...


Click to expand...


hazlnut said:
Frank Luntz - smart man.

Defending the indefensible...
Click to expand...

It's a classic Republican move..."we're not capitalist, we're men of enterprise"...anything to make the soft mind go "Well, that makes sense. He (in this case, Romney) is a businessman". And you know what, people will believe it and that's the tragedy of it all. Tragic because people will convince themselves that, "Yeah, Romney can create jobs," but they'll completely ignore the fact that in doing so his policies will do more to line the pockets of his "partners, investors and contributors" than they'll ever do to bridge the wealth gap between the wealth-class and the middle-class. In short, you may get a job, but the pay, benefit and incentives won't be any better than what you receive right now...if your earnings are below $200K.
 
Last edited:
Despite years of campaigning, repeated endorsements from the GOP "establishment," and a well organized/well financed campaign, presidential candidate Romney has only been able to attract the enthusiatic support of 25% of conservative voters.

Electibility, not his commitment to conservative ideology, is Romney's only "upside" when it comes to the other 75% of Republican/Tea Party voters - which puts into question their level of commitment to unseat "Obama 1" in favor of whom many consider "Obama 2."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom