Mitt was a bishop in his church ,whatever that means. No doubt he is very religious.

Mitt has no home State, he is a post-nationalist and it is a problem for him. That's why he keeps trying to claim Mass is his home, Michigan is his home, Utah is his home... the fact is that his fortune is not tied to any State or nation.... and that is very bad for governance.

Also, when I was living in Mass, Bill Weld was governor. He was very popular and very far from being a Democrat. Unfortunately for the GOP, Weld was not crazy enough to win the support of Jessie Helms and Ed Meese, or the rest of the retards who infected the party back then. He would have been a very strong Presidential candidate off his record as a Republican governor of Mass after being appointed by a Democrat President (Clinton) to serve as our Ambassador to Mexico.

Imagine, a fiscally conservative socially liberal former prosecutor and governor of Mass capable of winning the Hispanic vote! Weld's first wife, Susan Roosevelt Weld, formerly a professor at Harvard University specializing in ancient Chinese civilization and law served as General Counsel to the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, and is a great granddaughter of Theodore Roosevelt. Instead of having a very strong (and sane) candidate Bill Weld running right now, we get Mitt Romney thanks to the retard-go-round the GOP uses as its nomination process to appease far right asshats and religious zealots. :2 cents:

I agree with you.

Romney is a religious nut case.

But you can count me as one of the many who voted Obama in 2008 and now wish I had not.

At the beginning of Oct. I finally said "enough" and registered as a Libertarian. I'm voting for Gary Johnson.
I want Obama OUT. And yes, I know that Johnson isn't going to win.

But I'm going to vote my conscience anyway.

In my opinion Obama should be voted out. And if Romney wins he should be voted out in 4 years as well.
One and done for terms and these crooked politicians wouldn't spend the first 4 years trying to get re-elected instead of taking care of business.

Why is that? Am I utterly blind to Obama's lies?

Seriously. Point some out to me and let's debate those for a change. Start a new thread if you must.

Hang on now.

The same could be said about anybody who has lived in different places. I grew up in Fla. and went to college there. Left in 1988 and moved to Atlanta. Left there in 1992 and lived in South Carolina. Left there in 2008 and moved to Las Vegas.
I claim Florida, Georgia, SC, and Nevada as my "home"

As for politicians...they ALL live in Washington D.C.
They keep fake "residences" in their home states. And the ones who have been in office all their lives have never lived in their "home" state.

And look at Obama. He was Hawaiian. Then he went to college in New York. Then he began his political career in Chicago.
I'd say that Romney and Obama are similar in that respect. Obama's about 15 years younger and had a lot less political experience when he took office as President so he doesn't have quite as much background to make the comparison.

I didn't say "you" personally. I'm talking about guys like "Grant Mercury" for instance. Guys like him are fanatical about Obama

EDIT: Also if Obama ever wants to run for Emperor of all Canada I would say he would win in a landslide if the Canadian GFY posters are any indication :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Even Walter Mondale managed to win his home State. If you think Michigan or Mass feel any loyalty to Mitt (or from Mitt) you are very mistaken. Utah will go for Mitt because he is a Mormon. Obama lived in and practiced law in Chicago for many years. It is without a doubt his home town... he happened to be born in Hawaii (yes, Hawaii not Kenya) but people from Chicago see him as 'one of their own.'

I'm telling you...NOBODY will beat Obama for Mass.

Ted Kennedy gave his last political blessings to Obama. Ronald Reagan could have come back from the dead and Obama would still have won Mass. over him.

He's only ahead 50 to 46 percent in Utah. Sounds like Mormons don't all vote the same. That's pretty close.

Bill Weld would have crushed Obama in Mass by 30 or 40 percent of the electorate. :2 cents:

If Mitt actually did a good job in Mass the same people that voted him in as Governor would vote for him again as President.

The reality is he did a horrible job, ran up the debt and did the same exact thing everybody says he's not going to do now.

Am I the only one that is more surprised he was elected as governor than that the people favor Obama?

If Texas were to somehow, miraculously elect a Democrat governor, I would never in 1 million years also expect another miracle in electing that same person as president.

Polls are used by the media as a way to drive traffic to news coverage and boost ratings. It still amuses me that people talk about polling data from weeks and months before an election as if it is true. :1orglaugh

Watch the ad spends... that gives you a much more accurate view of what is going on. Has Obama even bought a billboard in Utah during the last four years? Here is another secret, so don't tell anyone.... Mississippi is going to vote for Mitt and New York is going to vote for Obama. Shhhh, I know the 'polls are close'... but I just have this hunch... :winkwink:

He claims the benefit of the former Governor's policies and the cleanup the subsequent Governor has done since he left as his own 'accomplishments.' I loved watching Obama point out Mitt was trying to take credit for educational performance based on policies enacted years before Romney took office.

No they wouldn't. He didn't do a "horrible job"

They had balanced budgets and unemployment under 5%

You're just making things up.

IF you watched the news over the last few decades...you would know that Ted Kennedy's goal was national health care. And Kennedy campaigned tirelessly for Obama in his final months on Earth. He even "passed the torch" to him at the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

The Kennedy's are beloved in Mass.
And nobody, but nobody is going to beat Obama in Mass.
Nobody.
You can make up stories and try to spin...but the fact is that Kennedy and Obama were very close at the end of Kennedy's life and that means a lot to the voters of Mass. Far more than a guy who was their gov. 10 years ago. (especially a Republican one)

Obama is ahead of Romney 65% to 34% in New York.

Romney is ahead of Obama 56% to 44% in Mississippi

Shhhhh...the polls aren't even close in those states :winkwink:

Yeah, that's why Mass reelected him a grand total of zero times! If he ran for reelection he would have lost. He ended 16 straight years of Republican Governors in Mass... riding the Bill Weld coat-tails until the wheels fell off and the State went Democrat in response to Romney running up their debt and failing to deliver most of what he promised. Mass had a very Democratic State house and a Republican governor for a very long time until Mitt wrecked it for the GOP.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/30/opinio...tts/index.html



Consider it foreshadowing... :2 cents:

But, but, but the race is 'tightening' and 'every vote really matters!' :1orglaugh

http://news.yahoo.com/us-may-soon-be...--finance.html
Just read this: US may soon become world's top oil producer

A FYI balancing the budget as a Governor is the law. So not an accomplishment

It is funny how all republicans think Romney won by a landslide, and Democrats think the same about Obama, but none of you morons have the slightest clue of what is going to happen on election day.

looks like america's future is all sorted

whew

Heard that today on the radio.

And if oil companies are allowed to go into federal lands & offshore it will be HUGE.

The news said today that just on the private and state lands the U.S. will become the new "middle east" of oil in the next few years.

That's what Ive been saying that I've read. That oil companies have developed new technologies to find and get oil that they didn't even know existed ten years ago.
It's a very real possibility that we can actually increase world supply enough to start bringing those gas prices way down by bringing the price for a barrel of oil way down on the global market.
That is great news!

Yes it is an "accomplishment".

I hope you noticed that our career politicians in Congress won't allow the same thing for the Federal govt.

Relax man, we are just talking here. I don't get offended when you mock me and stuff.

I would like to think that I'm able to make up my own mind without the media telling me what to decide. And what I'm seeing online is people utterly mocking Romney. I don't see people mocking Obama or pointing out Obama's lies - and I half of my friends on Facebook seem to be Republicans.

Am I missing something here?

I also saw this too and was surprised.

We always think of all of the oil as being in the Middle East. But the truth is that's all the Middle East has.

Never ever gonna happen. Oddly enough oil production is up, oil imports is down, and the cost of gas is nearly at it's high point.

Yep in the article they talk about the high prices being the motivation for all the drilling.

A freudian slip?

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Why didn't they reelect him then?

Come on bro...read the news. He didn't run for re-election.

He did what all politicians should do...served one term and left. It was good enough for George Washington...and Obama claimed he would if he didn't fix the economy...but they all seem to want to hang on to that power like a drug.

A little help.

-

Romney's term ended on January 4, 2007. Having chosen not to run for re-election, he filed the papers establishing his exploratory presidential committee the day before leaving office.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governo...of_Mitt_Romney

Nothing wrong with that. At least he didn't pull a Sarah Palin and walk out on his responsibilities as gov. like she did when she got the Vice Pres. nod from McCain and left in the middle of office.

Either way, it answers epitome's question. Though why on earth anybody wouldn't look this stuff up for themselves is beyond me.

Is that how you see it? Seems to me like he cut all cuts in state spending and raised fees for everything. Sounds logical, doesn't it? He reduced all state services, putting all of the strain onto county and city governments causing property taxes to raise 10%, and at the same time raised taxes on everything from gas to marriage licenses.

He kept unemployment under 5%? Not really. Unemployed under him did in fact drop down to 4.6%, but that was national trend at the time. Massachusetts unemployement rate was slightly lower than the national rate when he took office, but was higher than the national rate when he left office. Massachusetts ranked 47th out of 50 states during Romney?s four years as governor in terms of job creation. By comparison, Massachusetts ranked 37th in job growth under Swift, and it ranked 10th in Patrick?s first term.

Romney left office with a 37% approval rating.

You watch... Eventually Tesla or someone else is going to produce an electric car that they can sell to the masses at a decent price... And suddenly the oil industry is utterly fucked.

Just wait until the Middle East has nothing to offer anyone. LOL.

Sounds like you got it all figured out and Romney was a terrible, terrible governor. The guy must have no leadership skills at all.

Guess it doesn't matter since he's a long shot to win the electoral college.

And my guy Johnson won't win.

So you get Obama for four more years. :)
I hope he figures out what he's doing since you seem to think he's doing a better job as President than Romney did as governor. I hope you're right. :)

That would be sweet!

I've wanted a Tesla for the last few years. Told anyone who would listen that it sure is funny that a little company like Tesla made bad ass electric cars all on it's own...while Detroit can't make a single decent one.

He didn't run because he knew he wasn't re-electable. I don't know his approval rating but someone said 37% in this thread.

His Presidential aspirations would have been shot down if he ran again and lost so he didn't.

Stop looking at things through rose colored glasses. You say irrelevant things like unemployment was down under 5% when that was true for many states. You say he balanced a budget in a strong economy when that was true of many states at that time.

He is also on video talking about how much he relied on money from DC to accomplish things and now he is going to cut spending?

You got it man. He is a total loser. He has no accomplishments and is not a real leader. Everything he has done has either been a failure, a fluke, or because he's such a liar.

Wait a minute...you just said he balance the budget in a "strong economy"? Wouldn't that have been the Bush years? OMG!!!

Okay...just strike that. Put that in a drawer along with Obama's broken promises and bad economy.

Quickly! Hide it!

Okay. Now I feel better. Gee that was close.

Now back to what I was saying: Romney is a total and complete loser. And Obama is the baby Jesus.
There, that's better...

How can anyone say they trust Romney after watching him be starkly different people in the last 3 debates, as well as the last few months? He's a classic sociopath and liar of the highest order.

It would be one thing if he at least would admit that he's come around on an issue, and his stance is evolving -- but he looks you straight in the eye and acts like this new position has always been his position.

I've known people like that, and they will tell you the sky is green and expect you to believe it. They were always bad fucking news, and so is this scum.

He's pretending to be a human being and barely makes it through that 90 minutes. He looks like he's going to implode during the debates. It's fucking palpable.

Hang him! The guy is a fucking lying piece of garbage! I can't believe he's allowed to live! I've know guys like him too...mufti-millionaires who were also governors and running for president...they are all the same. I won't even answer the phone anymore when those people call me up!
Grrrrr...

There was a really good article a while back about how the republican party as it is right now is headed for extinction because of these things. Blacks and Latinos are the fastest growing segment of the population and the young people in this country (those age 12-22) are far more liberal on social things than their parents or other generations before them. They don't have as many racial hangups and they are fine with things like gay marriage. Sure, some of them may change as they get a little older, but many of them will get to voting age with these things still in tact and the republicans are moving further and further to the right.

You could see some effort on the republican party during this election to show that they have diversity and minorities, but really they only have a select few. If they don't do something to change that it may just bite them in the ass in the next 10-12 years.

If Romney loses the election I bet in the next 2 years we see the republicans start to soften on some of the social stuff and work hard to try to court minority voters.

We all know that most politicians aren't admirable people, and we have to live with that --but you have to question the motives of a guy who already has everything, and wants to hold the highest seat of power in the nation(some would argue, the world). We know he doesn't possess empathy, based on watching him show his true self in that "47%" video. So this rich motherfucker who is having no problems making money hand over fist, feels the need to make things better for the little guy? He just wants to add the status of being president to his legacy.

You mean like Kennedy and FDR and Teddy Roosevelt?

I'm voting for Gary Johnson. But if I had no choice, I'd trust a guy who doesn't need the money from special interest groups. Or as Romney himself said in the campaign: Obama is desperate to keep the job, Romney said he doesn't need the job.

For Romney this is just his next conquest. He was a huge success at business and made hundreds of millions. He then decided to go into politics. Being president is the only thing left to fill in his resume.

You always have to question anyone who will spend a billion dollars convincing people to give them a job. In the end I think Obama wants to be president because politics is pretty much all he has ever known and I think he feels he can do some good in the job. I think Romney wants the job because he wants it and not for any specific reason other than it is the ultimate status symbol.

Well, I look around me and things are better now than when Obama first took office. However, I've always said the only thing needed to get past this economic mess is time and we've had four years of time.

When Obama took office I started a thread here on GFY about my home town. Construction came to a halt; a condo complex stopped right in the middle of construction - they had concrete pads with wiring and plumbing sticking out, half built condos next to units that were built and occupied... Six months ago they started rebuilding. In that same thread I mentioned that out of the twenty houses on my street, exactly half of them were empty... Now all of them - finally at last - are occupied.

Would things have been better if McCain took office? I'm pretty confident that Palin would have given McCain a heart attack over something she did or said ("I can see Russia from my backyard") and now McCain would be dead and Palin would be in office.

Do I think things would be better four years from now if Romney was in office? Sure. He'll keep our taxes the same but scramble to cut all federal benefits while trying to increase the military while lowering our deficit - all while trying to create more jobs. Freeway projects will come screeching to a halt (thanks for the $300 million freeway bypass for my town, btw), putting even more stress on smaller towns and counties, while increasing taxes on gas and god knows what else - got to pay for his military spending and deficit cutting somehow..... I'm former military and god bless our troops, but he needs to spend more to do what - make our military even stronger than it is now, the most powerful military in the world? In the end he'll do what he always does - borrow money from someone else (increase the deficit), send jobs to China, and then walk away when it's time to declare bankruptcy.

I am stunned that this is the best the Republican party has to offer. Better than Herman Cain, but still....

I don't understand why they aren't selling like fucking pancakes. Even at $50k a pop they should be scrambling to make as many as they can. If they can sell a Toyota Prius for $40k, they can sell a Tesla for $50k.

This is what I don't get. His accomplishments were the same as all other states during a boom period, he was ranked the lowest out of all governors, and someone thought it would be a good idea for him to run?

From Wikiedpia:
How the fuck can you take that and a month later announce your running for President of the United States? How to Republicans look at that and say "Clearly, he's our man". Let's take one of the least popular governors ever and try to make him president? That's a joke, right?

The problem is mindset. Many people have it in their head that an electric car won't work for them because of the range limitations. They see that it has a 200 mile range and say, "I need something that goes further than that." They do this because they are thinking of the one weekend trip they took during the last year where they had to drive further than that. The don't realize that most people drive less than 50 miles per day so an electric car will work fine 99% of the time.

Tesla is working on fixing that. They just unveiled 6 charging stations that can charge their model S car enough in 30 minutes that you can drive it for 3 hours at 60mph. The chargers are free to use and power themselves with solar power.

If they can get these types of things out there in major cities and heavily traveled interstates it could help lead a lot of people to an electric car.