Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Romney's been running for president for 5 or 6 years. The Republicans don't like him. When afforded the opportunity to select a candidate to represent them as president, they choose overwhelmingly, Not Romney.
Never mind. I can see you don't get it. Most on the left don't seem to understand it so I'm just going to stop trying after this. They seem to think Republicans were faced with with a binary choice between Romney, the default candidate; and Not Romney, a conglomeration of everybody else running. That's not the case. We had 7 candidates to choose from when the primaries began. Reasonably, the candidates should be expected to get about 14% of the vote on average. Once it whittled down to four people, you could expect each one to get 25% of the vote on average. Romney has well exceed those averages from the start. He may not be every Republican's top choice for president, but he is the most popular choice for president. More Republicans chose him than anyone else. Unless you can somehow provide evidence to the contrary, the people who didn't pick Romney as their top choice still like him. Your claim that they don't like him is totally unfounded, it just means they liked someone else better. Where's my evidence? I don't know - empirical evidence from every primary ever.
The fact is, I guarantee you (and I will publicly eat these words if I am wrong) that Romney will end up with a greater share of the primary vote this year than Obama did in the 2008 primaries. And Obama was in a 2-3 person race, not a 3-4 person race. Hillary got more votes than him. Those people weren't voting "Not Obama" they were voting for Clinton. Many of them still liked Obama, he just wasn't their top choice. Then when the general election came along, they rallied behind Obama without reservation. The same will happen here.
But I know you will read this and repost your OP rather than respond to what I said or actually explain why I have not effectively refuted your assertion. That's fine though, it the only confirmation I need that I am right and you don't know what to say
They seem to think Republicans were faced with with a binary choice between Romney, the default candidate; and Not Romney, a conglomeration of everybody else running.
Makes sense...the majority did choose someone other than the establishment guy who's been running for 6 years....
Makes sense...the majority did choose someone other than the establishment guy who's been running for 6 years....
If you don't think Pawlenty, Bachmann, Huntsman, Perry, Newt, and Paul have been planning this run for years, you have your head in the sand. We had a great variety of candidates to choose from, not a binary choice between Romney/Not Romney. I don't care if you don't think the other candidates ere good, of course you don't - you're a liberal. The fact is they are more than just not Romneys. But from among a large field of candidates, one emerged as the leader, and that was Mitt Romney. The plurality chose Romney. It's unreasonable to expect a majority in a 4-7 way race, but 41% is a pretty darn stand-out performance in a field that large.
Never mind. I can see you don't get it. Most on the left don't seem to understand it so I'm just going to stop trying after this. They seem to think Republicans were faced with with a binary choice between Romney, the default candidate; and Not Romney, a conglomeration of everybody else running. That's not the case. We had 7 candidates to choose from when the primaries began. Reasonably, the candidates should be expected to get about 14% of the vote on average. Once it whittled down to four people, you could expect each one to get 25% of the vote on average. Romney has well exceed those averages from the start. He may not be every Republican's top choice for president, but he is the most popular choice for president. More Republicans chose him than anyone else. Unless you can somehow provide evidence to the contrary, the people who didn't pick Romney as their top choice still like him. Your claim that they don't like him is totally unfounded, it just means they liked someone else better. Where's my evidence? I don't know - empirical evidence from every primary ever.
The fact is, I guarantee you (and I will publicly eat these words if I am wrong) that Romney will end up with a greater share of the primary vote this year than Obama did in the 2008 primaries. And Obama was in a 2-3 person race, not a 3-4 person race. Hillary got more votes than him. Those people weren't voting "Not Obama" they were voting for Clinton. Many of them still liked Obama, he just wasn't their top choice. Then when the general election came along, they rallied behind Obama without reservation. The same will happen here.
But I know you will read this and repost your OP rather than respond to what I said or actually explain why I have not effectively refuted your assertion. That's fine though, it the only confirmation I need that I am right and you don't know what to say
The PUMAs sure didn't like Obama. They were POed and were switching to Republican to vote against Obama.
How do I know? Because I helped them pass out fliers. I told them I was Republican but for us, it was a "war" to keep Obama out of office. Didn't work but there were a LOT of PUMAs and they did NOT like Obama.
If you don't think Pawlenty, Bachmann, Huntsman, Perry, Newt, and Paul have been planning this run for years, you have your head in the sand. We had a great variety of candidates to choose from, not a binary choice between Romney/Not Romney. I don't care if you don't think the other candidates ere good, of course you don't - you're a liberal. The fact is they are more than just not Romneys. But from among a large field of candidates, one emerged as the leader, and that was Mitt Romney. The plurality chose Romney. It's unreasonable to expect a majority in a 4-7 way race, but 41% is a pretty darn stand-out performance in a field that large.
lol...You have no idea what I am.
Why did you leave out Herman Cain?
The Conservatives don't think Romney is a great choice, in fact they've written tons of articles stating he isn't a conservative...then they voted for the other guys.
The Conservatives don't think Romney is a great choice, in fact they've written tons of articles stating he isn't a conservative...then they voted for the other guys.
The Conservatives don't think Romney is a great choice, in fact they've written tons of articles stating he isn't a conservative...then they voted for the other guys.
Because Herman Cain dropped out before the first Primary.
The Conservatives don't think Romney is a great choice, in fact they've written tons of articles stating he isn't a conservative...then they voted for the other guys.
I left him out because I was only listing candidates that I was certain had been planning this run ever since November of 2008. I have no idea what Herman Cain was thinking at that time.
So, by your logic, how conservative one is, is a function of how many people in the GOP primary voted for someone else. Okay, then the "other guys" are even less conservative because Not Santorum, Not Gingrich, etc all got more votes than Not Romney. Actually, Not Romney is the worst performing candidate out of all the "Not" candidates. I guess that means Romney is the most conservative.
Do you see how much sense your logic makes? I do think Romney was the best conservative running, but I certainly didn't arrive at that conclusion from your bizarre methodology.
And to answer your questions - its no secret you're a liberal. I've read your posts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
