I do not see the enthusiasm for Mitt as in past Republican candidates (stickers and signs in the Villages)....Curious, how do you rate Romney on a scale from 1 to 10 (10 being good, of course)...Who is your second choice?

Originally Posted by jebartle

I do not see the enthusiasm for Mitt as in past Republican candidates (stickers and signs in the Villages)....Curious, how do you rate Rhomney on a scale from 1 to 10 (10 being good, of course)...Who is your second choice?

I would have rather have had McCain run again against Obama. McCain just needed a better VP pick.

Mitt Romney is about a 6 in my estimation. Good on economic affairs with respect to big business. Good also if you are a Republican with respect to lessening government regulation of big business.

Bad on foreign affairs as far as I can tell. Very little charisma.

Romney's good on health care if you view him from his record as MA Governor.

This is a Democrat's view of Mitt Romney though. Obama is much better on human and women's rights; foreign affairs; health care; etc. Obama would only get about a 7 though. He has not been able to build any kind of bipartisan cooperation in DC.

Originally Posted by jebartle

I do not see the enthusiasm for Mitt as in past Republican candidates (stickers and signs in the Villages)....Curious, how do you rate Rhomney on a scale from 1 to 10 (10 being good, of course)...Who is your second choice?

Jeb Bush would have been a much better choice for republicans. He is strong with hispanics, being married to a Mexican woman and speaking fluent Spanish; extremely popular in Florida, therefore carrying the state; popular with conservatives, without being viewed as an extremist. Unfortunately, his last name is Bush, although he is probably the smarter brother. Jeb would have given President Obama a much bigger challenge to run against than Mitt Romney.

As far as Romney goes, I'd probably give him a three just for showing up. Romney says one thing and five minutes later says he was misquoted or never said it. Sometimes I think he has short term memory loss.

I read a quote the other day that said "any astute politician is not going to run when he knows he can't win". That is probably the reason Bush, Gov Mitch Daniels, Gov Chris Christie, and others decided to sit this one out.

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

This is a Democrat's view of Mitt Romney though. Obama is much better on human and women's rights; foreign affairs; health care; etc. Obama would only get about a 7 though. He has not been able to build any kind of bipartisan cooperation in DC.

I am not going to participate in a rating - way too subjective and meritless. However, as to your last point, I would find it hard to fault Obama for failure to build bipartisan cooperation. The limbaughs, norquists, tea party congressmen and the like have vowed to do everything they can to see that he fails. While many presidents have fought bitterly with the opposition, I have never before heard people of influence (some more, some less) proclaim they wished our president to fail. Seems to me to be tantamount to wishing our country to fail so I can't see them as patriots.

I'm not finished my appraisal yet. He fluctuates from 5 to 7 then back to a weak 5. My fear is he won't be be able to make a difference in the economy.

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

I am not going to participate in a rating - way too subjective and meritless. However, as to your last point, I would find it hard to fault Obama for failure to build bipartisan cooperation. The limbaughs, norquists, tea party congressmen and the like have vowed to do everything they can to see that he fails. While many presidents have fought bitterly with the opposition, I have never before heard people of influence (some more, some less) proclaim they wished our president to fail. Seems to me to be tantamount to wishing our country to fail so I can't see them as patriots.

You are very backward in your thinking or you don't understand the conservative viewpoint at all.

Obama failing in advancing his agenda is the only thing that can save this country.

A true patriot opposes Obama, and works for an end to his regime.

The Obama recovery has been stated to be the worse "recovery" in American History. No one with a record like this leads in the poll unless the American public has given up or the polls are devoid of any truth.

More to come; I gotta run for now. The real boss has spoken.

These politicians who claim "I was a businessman, I created jobs, I know how to create jobs, I will create jobs if you vote for me", crack me up. While knowledge of economics, business management etc. are useful, these people have little or no clue how to run a national economy or fix our problems, much less actually create jobs. I don't care how large or successful the business you ran, it in virtually no way relates to running the government, either in scale, or power. A CEO can decide the business is going to take a new direction, and within a month his/her vision can be put into reality. In government there is no ability to that by oneself, unless you are FDR, and he could not do it today with the current D.C. environment.

let it suffice for me to say I rank him significantly better as a candidate than Obama. And to keep it at parity my comparison is when Obama was a candidate.

No need to espouse my well versed position on Obama's tenure as POTUS....

btk

Originally Posted by RichieLion

You are very backward in your thinking or you don't understand the conservative viewpoint at all.

Obama failing in advancing his agenda is the only thing that can save this country.

A true patriot opposes Obama, and works for an end to his regime.

The Obama recovery has been stated to be the worse "recovery" in American History. No one with a record like this leads in the poll unless the American public has given up or the polls are devoid of any truth.

More to come; I gotta run for now. The real boss has spoken.

I may be backward in my thinking but if that IS the conservative viewpoint, I hope I never understand it. It is one thing to point to a leader and say, "see he failed because of flawed policies or flawed idiology", but to want him/her to fail before the fact, and then doing everything possible to assure his failure is sad and unpatriotic. I see Bush as a failed president largely because of Iraq, but I sure as hell didn't wish him to fail when he took us there.

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

These politicians who claim "I was a businessman, I created jobs, I know how to create jobs, I will create jobs if you vote for me", crack me up. While knowledge of economics, business management etc. are useful, these people have little or no clue how to run a national economy or fix our problems, much less actually create jobs. I don't care how large or successful the business you ran, it in virtually no way relates to running the government, either in scale, or power. A CEO can decide the business is going to take a new direction, and within a month his/her vision can be put into reality. In government there is no ability to that by oneself, unless you are FDR, and he could not do it today with the current D.C. environment.

That's true. I do get that. You almost need a Stalin, Hilter or Chairman Mao in terms of power to run a country like a business. Mitt Romney was also not really someone who runs a business. Bain Capital under Romney tried to make various businesses more profitable by cutting and trimming human resources and unprofitable divisions. What's Romney going to do? Have say California form its own country; restructure Nevada?

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

I may be backward in my thinking but if that IS the conservative viewpoint, I hope I never understand it. It is one thing to point to a leader and say, "see he failed because of flawed policies or flawed idiology", but to want him/her to fail before the fact, and then doing everything possible to assure his failure is sad and unpatriotic. I see Bush as a failed president largely because of Iraq, but I sure as hell didn't wish him to fail when he took us there.

I am glad someone said that. I am not authorized to be that straight forward yet, so thank you for saying what so many of us wanted to say. I wonder if I will be insulted for agreeing with you....

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

These politicians who claim "I was a businessman, I created jobs, I know how to create jobs, I will create jobs if you vote for me", crack me up. While knowledge of economics, business management etc. are useful, these people have little or no clue how to run a national economy or fix our problems, much less actually create jobs. I don't care how large or successful the business you ran, it in virtually no way relates to running the government, either in scale, or power. A CEO can decide the business is going to take a new direction, and within a month his/her vision can be put into reality. In government there is no ability to that by oneself, unless you are FDR, and he could not do it today with the current D.C. environment.

First of all, you are correct in what you say about claims and promises to do anything, however it does ring a bit truer from someone who actually performed in the real world in some capacity, and not spent his entire life running for office of some kind.

Secondly, the most pressing need to your point, of our next president is to build bridges in Washington and create dialogue. Again, our current President has had three years and has failed miserably. He flat out stopped when he realized he could do what he wanted the first two years and THAT ACT OF JUST PLAIN NOT CARING...is what allowed the right wing tea party type folks to get elected in 2010 and destroy any chance.

Seems like a pretty easy choice to me on all your points. One is and has been NOTHING but a politician and the other a proven leader in a number of areas in his life.

One had a chance to build bridges and failed totally...the other has done that in a number of areas as well.

Nobody is perfect but this choice is easy and important.

The OP only ask to rate Mitt. Since Mitt is the presumptive presidential candidate for the Republican Party I am going to rate him a 10 and give him 100% of my support and confidence.

Originally Posted by rubicon

The OP only ask to rate Mitt. Since Mitt is the presumptive presidential candidate for the Republican Party I am going to rate him a 10 and give him 100% of my support and confidence.

Ditto!!

Originally Posted by rubicon

The OP only ask to rate Mitt. Since Mitt is the presumptive presidential candidate for the Republican Party I am going to rate him a 10 and give him 100% of my support and confidence.

I hear Tammy Wynette - "Stand by your man".