Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Sign in to follow this  
2046

Romney-Palin 2012

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Conservative superstar Sarah Palin opened the door yesterday to joining forces with Mitt Romney for a 2012 White House run - a hot ticket that has some Republicans licking their chops at the prospect of unseating President Obama.

“Sounds pretty good,” Palin declared at yesterday’s Tea Party Express rally on the Common when asked about pairing up with the former Bay State governor - giving the idea a big thumbs-up as she left the stage after her headline speech.

Last night, as Palin stopped for cannoli at Mike’s Pastry in the North End, she said she was “serious” about the idea.

“I have a lot of respect for Mitt,” she told the Herald.

Asked who would be on top of the ticket, Palin roared, “Ha! I haven’t even thought that far ahead yet.”

[...]

Romney, a presumptive 2012 Republican presidential contender who recently embarked on a nationwide book tour, has not ruled out an alliance with Palin, the GOP’s 2008 vice presidential candidate.

“Mitt Romney respects Sarah Palin and he appreciates the contributions she makes to the party,” said Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom. “But his immediate focus is on helping Republicans win back the Congress in 2010.”

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politi...&position=0

:dough:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Socialism is starting to look good right about now.

Socialism never looks good, no matter how incompetent the candidates may be. This is how we got Obamassiah in the first place. I distinctly recall Objectivists on this very board preferring to vote for Obama rather than McCain/Palin and refusing to cooperate with conservatives on the basis of religious belief. Look where that got us. I would not really care for a Romney/Palin ticket, but would prefer it infinitely to four more years of a Marxist/Leninist mini-dictatorship.

The important thing is the upcoming Congressional elections. We need to elect candidates who are going to take their constitutional responsibilities seriously, as a co-equal branch and a check on the imperial presidency. Likewise the Senate, which is meant to be a brake on populist legislation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, it's just not that simple with me. It's more like I have to choose between fascism and socialism.

If Obama wins, this country may die a quick death. If Mitt wins, then he's just going to retard it. Republicans don't reverse regulations, they just mitigate. They're just like "Oh, let's hope it doesn't get worse". Then, when worse comes to worse, they try to offer a counter-plan that invovles less government spending or regulations. Obama didn't want to have a Massachusetts-Style health care system. That's what the Republicans hoped for, because they considered it to be "less government".

I can't honestly say that I'd be rooting for Mitt over Obama, at any rate, it's not that cut and dry with me. I'm more willing to co-operate with libertarians than conservatives. I have no reason to judge someone's qualifications by their religion.

Edited by Black Wolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would prefer someone besides Romney, but a choice between him and the current marxist regime is pretty much a no-brainer to me. I'd rather a slow boat to Hell rather than a rocket sled on greased skids, like we have now. I'm not inferring that you judged any candidate by their religion, but others here did, and either abstained form voting or went for the Marxist based on that criteria. That was a foolish move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No mater what, there will be droves of people running around in circles screaming "The market has failed!" when the fallout from this administration's crimes starts getting heavy, but the straw man will be much bigger if the GOP is in power. When it comes to 2012, I think I would definitely support this ticket if the congress goes back to blue, and abstain otherwise. I prefer actually voting for deadlock, since the "slow boat" wasn't so slow last time, but in this case the idea of putting Obama's name on a ballot is absolutely nauseating so I would compromise. On the other hand if the conservatives prove they have some balls before then I might vote for them regardless. Too early to tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Socialism never looks good, no matter how incompetent the candidates may be. This is how we got Obamassiah in the first place. I distinctly recall Objectivists on this very board preferring to vote for Obama rather than McCain/Palin

Any names on that ( the voting for Obama part)?

and refusing to cooperate with conservatives on the basis of religious belief.

More exactly, because their entire politics is derived from their religion. If they were advocating for Capitalism, and happened to be devout Muslims or Christians on the side, I'd support them in a heartbeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put a gun in my mouth and paint the walls with my brains.

Here we ho again.

There is no slower boat to Hell. It's a decision between a boat that has a nice yellow and red paint job and one that is adorned in crosses, playing gospel music.

Edited by TheEgoist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Put a gun in my mouth and paint the walls with my brains.

Here we ho again.

There is no slower boat to Hell. It's a decision between a boat that has a nice yellow and red paint job and one that is adorned in crosses, playing gospel music.

:dough: OK. All boats to hell are equal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no slower boat to Hell. It's a decision between a boat that has a nice yellow and red paint job and one that is adorned in crosses, playing gospel music.
...and a sign that says "Destination: Heaven". We can thank the GOP equally with the Dems for our current rotten economy, even though they said they were heading toward a heavenly economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Black Wolf on this one. I don't want to lend any legitimacy to the Republican establishment whatsoever. They know this is their last chance to get it right. If America shows them that they reject neocon and religious candidates over Obama and still demand an end to socialism, then the Republican party either has to put a Ron Paulian or Goldwater-like candidate in or it's finished.

Edited by 2046

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any names on that ( the voting for Obama part)?

Nope, it was on one of the looooong election threads. Names at this point are not pertinent.

More exactly, because their entire politics is derived from their religion. If they were advocating for Capitalism, and happened to be devout Muslims or Christians on the side, I'd support them in a heartbeat.

So in the meantime we do what? Just sit on our hands and allow the Republic to be destroyed slice by slice? The Repubs are not ideal from a pro-capitalist standpoint, but the Demoncats are infinitely worse. What are we to do? I think it would buy time to put the brakes on the current madness by negating Obammassiah's Dem majority in the House, then work to clean out the Senate election by election. These are more critical than who sits in the White House - witness the Clinton administration, which started out Hell bent for leather with Hillary Care and massive spending increases - not to mention a retroactive tax on people who had already died. The Republican victory in '94 was able to bring spending under control and defeat their attempt at socialized medicine.

Edited by Maximus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm with Black Wolf on this one. I don't want to lend any legitimacy to the Republican establishment whatsoever.

I'm not for lending legitimacy to the current establishment either. I think you're all not getting what I'm on about here. The current leadership (of both parties) and most of the Congress must be cleaned out, and people put in who understand constitutional limitations. It is up to the voters to do this and hold them accountable. Complacency got us where we are today - along with the so-called "War on Terror," which Bush used to great effect to distract the citizenry from his socialist tendencies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope, it was on one of the looooong election threads. Names at this point are not pertinent.

If you want me to believe an actual Objectivist would vote for Obama, you'll have to tell me who that is. Otherwise I can't believe that.

So in the meantime we do what? Just sit on our hands and allow the Republic to be destroyed slice by slice? The Repubs are not ideal from a pro-capitalist standpoint, but the Demoncats are infinitely worse.

No they're not. The bills Bush and Romney alone signed into law, during their presidency and governorship, are easily more damaging to their respective subjects than what Obama signed to date. Even worse, Bush and Romney are actually claiming to act in the name of freedom, while Obama is openly a leftist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inasmuch as presidential candidates don't choose their running mates until after winning their party's nomination, the idea of Romney-Palin is waaaay premature. For starters, Mitt Romney is a horrible candidate. The Massachusetts healthcare debacle alone should disqualify him politically. Unfortunately, there aren't any good contenders out there that I am aware of (fortunately, it's only 2010, so there is still a year for that to change although I'm not optimistic).

As far as Palin, she should not be on any ticket. It's bad enough she's on Fox News jumbling her words and personifying the assault on reason. Come on America, you can do better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Absolutely. After all, you can thank Mitt Romney for the horrible Massachusetts Health Care "Reform".

"I like mandates!" Is this guy not a textbook Straussian?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you want me to believe an actual Objectivist would vote for Obama, you'll have to tell me who that is. Otherwise I can't believe that.

Some relevant threads:

http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.php?showtopic=12794

http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.php?showtopic=8880

http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.php?showtopic=8636

A quick examination shows at least 8 folks in support. The first poll shows 15% in favor of Obama. Some specific names: Mammon, Tenzing Shaw, Sanjavalen.

IT'S ALL THEIR FAULT! ;)

Edited by brian0918

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. I found one right off, on the first thread, first page - more follow. Just look at the poll. I knew damn good and well people on here said it, i remember thinking WTF? What are these people smoking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this telling:

Just to spoil the party a bit, but for those people who are thinking about voting republican in the next election, then you guys need to reexamine your understanding of the practical role of philosophy in man’s actual life. Socialism is dead, religion is more of a threat.

designalldll.png

Edited by Maximus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember Ayn Rand saying something about weak arguments being more harmful to an issue and having no argument at all. I can't find it but I know I've read it.

Well, conservatism is an extremely weak argument against democratic socialism.

I'd much rather get this over with as soon as possible. I would love to see the seeds of rational self interest start to grow within my own life time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I seem to remember Ayn Rand saying something about weak arguments being more harmful to an issue and having no argument at all. I can't find it but I know I've read it.

Well, conservatism is an extremely weak argument against democratic socialism.

I'd much rather get this over with as soon as possible. I would love to see the seeds of rational self interest start to grow within my own life time.

So, you'd rather see this Republic, which, incidentally, Ms. Rand so loved and considered the greatest nation on earth, fail, rather than preserve it short term and improve it as a long term goal?

Talk about a weak argument.

"To save the patient, we must kill him!" ;)

Edited by Maximus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×