Mitt Romney announces potential 2016 presidential run

[Laerod]

once its that long what does it matter exactly when it starts?

If it starts after I die, I'll be upset.

No, you'll be dead.

[The Emerald Dawn]

If it starts after I die, I'll be upset.

No, you'll be dead.

Well, that will be the good part.

[Farnhamia]

once its that long what does it matter exactly when it starts?

If it starts after I die, I'll be upset.

Yeah, but when you die, it'll seem as if it's starting, so there's that.

[Benuty]

If it starts after I die, I'll be upset.

Yeah, but when you die, it'll seem as if it's starting, so there's that.

Technically won't everyone else as well?

[The Emerald Dawn]

If it starts after I die, I'll be upset.

Yeah, but when you die, it'll seem as if it's starting, so there's that.

If the various parties who have informed me of my end destination have any validity to them, 1,000 is low balling my stay there.

[Zurkerx]

Well, third time's the charm, I suppose. However, he has stiff competition coming from Bush and Christie along with more extreme Republicans like Paul and Huckabee. It is going to come down to two things: whose got the money and who looks the most attractive to the party's eyes.

[Nigerian Kenya]

This guy needs to give up. now.

[Imperial Esplanade]

Republicans are Anti-social liberties?

That's about as accurate as all Democrats are communists.

their first day they passed abortion restrictions. that's bigtime anti-social liberty

No, that's actually being a bit more pro-life.

[Laerod]

their first day they passed abortion restrictions. that's bigtime anti-social liberty

No, that's actually being a bit more pro-life.

Not really.

[Imperial Esplanade]

This much is true.

Although I think we'll see a more genuine Mitt this go-around, that's if he decides to run, and I think it'll play to his advantage. He'll supposedly be taking a more centrist approach too, focusing on poverty and (like I said) foreign policy. He'll be appeal to the general American electorate with that strategy, but he'll have to beat out his conservative counterparts within the GOP to even have a chance.

What he'll have to do to get the nomination is what he did last time, prostrate himself before the far right wing of the party. If he doesn't, they'll stay home and he'll lose. Once he does that, he'll alienate anyone who considers themselves a moderate of any stripe and he'll lose. If you look at the aggregate poll numbers from 2012, even after the President's terrible performance in the first debate, Romney never had the lead. He narrowed things down that one time but he never, ever had a lead. A Romney/Rand ticket would be fun to run against. Romney/Cruz would be too easy.

Hence why I said "he'll have to beat out his conservative counterparts within the GOP to even have a chance."

That said, I don't think it'll be too difficult for him to beat out everyone else in the GOP. Remember that the overwhelming majority of Republicans are moderates, not "Tea Partiers." Also keep in mind how large and diverse the GOP field is expected to be, I suspect his familiarity from within the Republican Party will only help him clinch the nomination.

[Ashmoria]

their first day they passed abortion restrictions. that's bigtime anti-social liberty

No, that's actually being a bit more pro-life.

which is bigtime anti-social liberty.

it makes me wonder if all those people who couldn't be bothered to vote now understand that just because the republican candidates didn't TALK anti-social liberty politics it didn't mean that they WEREN'T anti-social liberty.

sigh

[The Emerald Dawn]

No, that's actually being a bit more pro-life.

which is bigtime anti-social liberty.

it makes me wonder if all those people who couldn't be bothered to vote now understand that just because the republican candidates didn't TALK anti-social liberty politics it didn't mean that they WEREN'T anti-social liberty.

sigh

Wait. Waitwaitwait.

You thought there were educated, informed voters in Presidential elections?

[Imperial Esplanade]

No, that's actually being a bit more pro-life.

Not really.

Being completely pro-life means to support one's right to live from conception till natural death. The GOP in Congress isn't completely pro-life, but passing abortion restrictions would be a bit more of a pro-life move.

[Ashmoria]

which is bigtime anti-social liberty.

it makes me wonder if all those people who couldn't be bothered to vote now understand that just because the republican candidates didn't TALK anti-social liberty politics it didn't mean that they WEREN'T anti-social liberty.

sigh

Wait. Waitwaitwait.

You thought there were educated, informed voters in Presidential elections?

I more think that its a shame that most voters cant be bothered to vote in the midterms so we get these terrible reps and senators. if the poorly informed democrats voted as often as the poorly informed republicans we wouldn't have so much trouble.

[Laerod]

Not really.

Being completely pro-life means to support one's right to live from conception till natural death. The GOP in Congress isn't completely pro-life, but passing abortion restrictions would be a bit more of a pro-life move.

No, as they've been getting women killed by forcing caesarian sections. It's an anti-abortion movement. The "pro-life" label is largely a lie.

[Farnhamia]

What he'll have to do to get the nomination is what he did last time, prostrate himself before the far right wing of the party. If he doesn't, they'll stay home and he'll lose. Once he does that, he'll alienate anyone who considers themselves a moderate of any stripe and he'll lose. If you look at the aggregate poll numbers from 2012, even after the President's terrible performance in the first debate, Romney never had the lead. He narrowed things down that one time but he never, ever had a lead. A Romney/Rand ticket would be fun to run against. Romney/Cruz would be too easy.

Hence why I said "he'll have to beat out his conservative counterparts within the GOP to even have a chance."

That said, I don't think it'll be too difficult for him to beat out everyone else in the GOP. Remember that the overwhelming majority of Republicans are moderates, not "Tea Partiers." Also keep in mind how large and diverse the GOP field is expected to be, I suspect his familiarity from within the Republican Party will only help him clinch the nomination.

The Tea Partiers have a great deal of money, whether or not they make up the majority of the GOP voters. All the Koch brothers have to do is jingle their coin purses and candidates will be falling all over themselves and asking "How high?" And I question that "the overwhelming majority of Republicans are moderates." If that were true, the Tea Party would be ancient history by now and a challenge to John Boehner for Speaker would be inconceivable.

[Imperial Esplanade]

No, that's actually being a bit more pro-life.

which is bigtime anti-social liberty.

it makes me wonder if all those people who couldn't be bothered to vote now understand that just because the republican candidates didn't TALK anti-social liberty politics it didn't mean that they WEREN'T anti-social liberty.

sigh

I apologize that my support for your right to live from your conception till your natural death, or anyone else's for that matter, is burdensome. I suppose it makes that burden a bit easier to deal with if you simply brush it as being "anti-social liberty" or whatever nonsense you're propagating.

[Imperial Esplanade]

Being completely pro-life means to support one's right to live from conception till natural death. The GOP in Congress isn't completely pro-life, but passing abortion restrictions would be a bit more of a pro-life move.

No, as they've been getting women killed by forcing caesarian sections. It's an anti-abortion movement. The "pro-life" label is largely a lie.

Da fu...

Stats, now.

[Ashmoria]

Not really.

Being completely pro-life means to support one's right to live from conception till natural death. The GOP in Congress isn't completely pro-life, but passing abortion restrictions would be a bit more of a pro-life move.

its solidly pro life. they are taking an incremental approach these days, chipping away at availability until abortion is so hard to get it may as well be illegal.

and its still anti social-liberty.

[Ashmoria]

which is bigtime anti-social liberty.

it makes me wonder if all those people who couldn't be bothered to vote now understand that just because the republican candidates didn't TALK anti-social liberty politics it didn't mean that they WEREN'T anti-social liberty.

sigh

I apologize that my support for your right to live from your conception till your natural death, or anyone else's for that matter, is burdensome. I suppose it makes that burden a bit easier to deal with if you simply brush it as being "anti-social liberty" or whatever nonsense you're propagating.

liberty is for women too.

[Laerod]

No, as they've been getting women killed by forcing caesarian sections. It's an anti-abortion movement. The "pro-life" label is largely a lie.

Da fu...

Stats, now.

Le voila.

[Imperial Esplanade]

Hence why I said "he'll have to beat out his conservative counterparts within the GOP to even have a chance."

That said, I don't think it'll be too difficult for him to beat out everyone else in the GOP. Remember that the overwhelming majority of Republicans are moderates, not "Tea Partiers." Also keep in mind how large and diverse the GOP field is expected to be, I suspect his familiarity from within the Republican Party will only help him clinch the nomination.

The Tea Partiers have a great deal of money, whether or not they make up the majority of the GOP voters. All the Koch brothers have to do is jingle their coin purses and candidates will be falling all over themselves and asking "How high?" And I question that "the overwhelming majority of Republicans are moderates." If that were true, the Tea Party would be ancient history by now and a challenge to John Boehner for Speaker would be inconceivable.

The thing with the Tea Party is that a select few districts continue to elect incredibly conservative members to Congress. So, it's not so much that the Republican Party has been hijacked as much as the GOP has just broadened a little bit more to include some VERY conservative (almost borderline Libertarian) members. I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing happened with the Democrats in 2016 and beyond, but with socialists instead of libertarians.

[Imperial Esplanade]

Da fu...

Stats, now.

Le voila.

That's literally just five cases. Women die from abortions too, you know, so... your point?

Anyway, that's hardly indicative of the Pro-Life movement, but rather indicative of the state of modern medicine and/or law enforcement. We don't have everything down pat, and people die every day from perfectly treatable, unavoidable, and preventable situations.

[Laerod]

Le voila.

That's literally just five cases. Women die from abortions too, you know, so... your point?

Anyway, that's hardly indicative of the Pro-Life movement, but rather indicative of the state of modern medicine and/or law enforcement. We don't have everything down pat, and people die every day from perfectly treatable, unavoidable, and preventable situations.

You asked why the "pro-life" label is a lie and I provided evidence that their policies kill. Reality is pesky like that, no?

[Liberty and Linguistics]

Le voila.

That's literally just five cases. Women die from abortions too, you know, so... your point?

Anyway, that's hardly indicative of the Pro-Life movement, but rather indicative of the state of modern medicine and/or law enforcement. We don't have everything down pat, and people die every day from perfectly treatable, unavoidable, and preventable situations.

Even more women die from abortion when it's illegal, since often times, unsafe abortions are carried out by people who lack a license or any prior experience and training. Personally, I'm not a fan of abortion, but I realize that it's not only a woman's choice, but that I'd prefer abortions to take place in clinics, as opposed to back alleys.


But, this is for a different thread.