Dems for Mitt: Because the GOP Deserves the Very Worst

Mitt Romney may be a phony, but he has a track record of getting things done. That's a good quality to have as a presidential candidate.

 

Thompson would have been much more impressive if didn't have to keep looking down at his notes to remember what his position was on issues.

LOL

 

y not fred thompson or ron paul?

 

I won't take your word for it, because while some of the individuals involved in 1993 might have been connected with bin laden at some point, he really didn't have much to do with it. You must be thinking of the 1998 embassy bombings.

 

This is funny. My co-workers and I had a discussion about this topic. I thought, and was wrong, that if you voted in a certain primary, you had to vote for the candidate of the primary you voted in. The reason I thought that is because of this issue. Its called political raiding. Voters from from one party voting in the primary of the other party for the worst candidate.

I thought I knew alot about the primary process but I've learned more this election season than ever. I thought that all primaries were closed.

 

**** Huckabee he is a ****ing dem who want's big government. He is a socialist who claims to be conservative. I'm not voting for someone who thinks the world is 6,000 years old and will govern by the bible while spending like Hillary or Obama

 

<object width="425" height="373"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PiCqxKLIVDY&rel=1&border=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PiCqxKLIVDY&rel=1&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="373"></embed></object>

 

is this really necessary? judging by the independent turnout in democratic primaries so far, dems are in control....

 

MIT WINS!

 

Romney's a phony, flipflopper and worst of all for the Christian right believes there's an addendum to the Bible but his record as governor has been pretty good and so far has a better record on health care than the Dems.. If the only choices we had in this election were the Repubs I would take a pretty serious look at Romney.

 

You have to give credit to Romney for his record as Governor with regards to health care. One of my best friends is a native Texan that's moved back and forth between Austin and Boston for a few years. He's self-employed, makes six figures, and has dealt with getting insurance coverage in both states. When he lived in Boston, health insurance was affordable, doctors visits reasonable, and medicines cost a co-pay at the drugstore. All part of Romney's universal insurance plan using private business in conjunction with the state. It's worked. Why he isn't running on his record mystifies me, like so much about Mitt.

Well, enjoy tonight, Mitt, because you won't be experiencing this a lot. (in my opinion!)



Impeach Bush.

 

Romney wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning in the Republican primaries by running on a record like that.

 

In a different system, with a truly separate executive with much less policy-setting power, Mitt would be the perfect president among those running. He has the best leadership track-record, bar none. He did pretty well in Taxachusetts, and did incredibly in the private sector and with the Olympics. Unfortunately for Mitt, our President has a big role in setting policy, and while I sorta agree with some of his platform, it doesn't match his record at all. Too bad, he seems like a very effective *******.

 

Love this, but it's probably not headed for a pro-Mitt bumper sticker anytime soon.