|
|
Again with the changing parameters. Being politically intelligent was not a criteria.Originally Posted by maverick
Fact is, the appearance of a person affects how they are perceived. For Romney, "looking presidential" is enough for some people and not all of them are stupid.
I didn't change parameters. I clarified the facts. The study mentioned nothing, as I said, of intelligence. Its results suggested that attractive politicians benefit disproportionately from television exposure, primarily among less knowledgeable individuals. Less knowledgeable does not mean less intelligent.
:icon_wink:
Enough already! Lay your cards on the table. For whom are you voting? No, not for whom do you wish to vote, or for whom should you have been able to vote; for whom are you voting?
i still haven't decided. that's why i'm posting on this thread.
i'll never vote for obama, obviously.
the problem, as i've stated before, is that a big governement republican can be just as bad as a moderate democrat. i thought that 4 years of obama would teach the republicans to nominate someone better, but it looks like it's just more of the same...
You're idea of "big government" is any government. That leaves no one for you to support, ever.
what have i said that leads you to believe i'm an anarchist?
You've only got two choices - Romney or Obama. You said no to Obama so that leaves Romney or not voting, but not voting is a vote for Obama. So hold your nose, vote Romney and quit wasting time with JuBru. JuBru, do likewise.
we discussed this in 2008. the fact that all of you voted for mccain is the reason we have basically the same choices this year. but i'm too tired to get into that discussion right now. the reason i got into this thread was in hopes that someone could convince me that romney is not who i thought he was. sadly, no new evidence was presented.
i may still vote for romney, because another 4 years of obama will be so destructive. but voting for romney sends the wrong message, and i'm afraid something drastic is going to have to happen before people learn that we can't just vote for all of the nice stuff we can't afford.
if romney is elected, he will very likely have a republican majority in both houses. will we see something similar to the first 4 years of bush (increasing spending while trying to look like a conservative, while congress pushes through whatever he wants)? maybe not, because many of the republicans will be tea partiers -- they may actually keep romney honest. this is the only reason i may consider voting for him.
In NYC, Alex Pelosi interviews welfare recipients:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2kGP...ature=youtu.be
Arkbob - I think we're in agreement on many issues. Romney is meh.
I also think that this critical election is not the time to send the country farther into the tank just to take a stand.
Ron Paul has made strides. His ideas are more popular now than 4 years ago. It will take time to continue to shift some widespread rino beliefs.
i'm leaning that way myself, but still on the fence. really, the same can be said of any election.
John Stossel for President!
9. Says that Trump is promoting "trickle-down racism".
https://www.boston.com/news/politics...omoting-racism
...time and again..
He must be talking about building the wall. That is not racist. Are there any other countries who enforce their borders, or are Trump and Cruz and millions of Americans the only ones in the world who believe in this?
The only thing Trump's said that could be considered racist is when he wanted the judge removed from the lawsuit. He prejudged the man based on his ethnicity, imo. I would even call that paranoia more than racism.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
