my head doesn't not hurt

That's nice. I don't not don't don't not don't not absolutely hate Rmoney, myself...

Im not so sure this headline wasn't brought to you by Chris Collinsworth.

I'm not unsurprised by how low Huntsman's unapproval ratings aren't

The Stealth Hippopotamus: He's not Obama

Neither am I. Therefore, I should be President.

Don't worry, my despotism will be of the benevolent variety.

What is good about Romney is that his is not that far to the right of Obama and he won't have the luxury of left wing apologists when he tramples people's rights or laughs at the "people on the internet" who want to legalize weed. We'd probably end up with less right wing polices with a republican president with liberal democrats back on their game instead of in lick obama taint mode.

jjorsett: The Stealth Hippopotamus: He's not Obama

Neither am I. Therefore, I should be President.

Don't worry, my despotism will be of the benevolent variety.

Sigh, okay... ill go set up your super pac.

I'd willingly vote for him, were a smarter, better trained, more competent version of the same basic political philosophy not already sitting in the position with no need for an expensive retraining period and most of the hard lessons already learned.

Basically, running against a number of other Democrats I could name? Sure, go Romney. Running against Obama? Ehhhhh... nah.

Romney is bad compared to what? Bubonic Plague? Anal warts?

Dusk-You-n-Me: It will be Obama vs Romney and Romney will lose.

It will be Romney Vs. Romney, and Romney will lose.

Headso: What is good about Romney is that his is not that far to the right of Obama and he won't have the luxury of left wing apologists when he tramples people's rights or laughs at the "people on the internet" who want to legalize weed. We'd probably end up with less right wing polices with a republican president with liberal democrats back on their game instead of in lick obama taint mode.

Headso: We'd probably end up with less right wing polices with a republican president with liberal democrats back on their game instead of in lick obama taint mode.

Hahahaha. No.

I'm really hoping Romney wins with under 35% tonight. Romney 35 Paul and Huntman around 20 would be good

Headso: What is good about Romney is that his is not that far to the right of Obama and he won't have the luxury of left wing apologists when he tramples people's rights or laughs at the "people on the internet" who want to legalize weed. We'd probably end up with less right wing polices with a republican president with liberal democrats back on their game instead of in lick obama taint mode.

Sorry, but that doesn't sound "good" to me. I'd rather criticize Obama heavily for NDAA and other Bush-related fallout than toss out an otherwise favorable administration and its policies, which you're clearly not admitting has produced accomplishments.

Carth: I'm really hoping Romney wins with under 35% tonight. Romney 35 Paul and Huntman around 20 would be good

I really hope he wraps it up tonight and everybody else drops out. The sooner the general election starts, the sooner Romney can get to grenading his own campaign. It's not going to take very many "I like firing people" and "corporations are people too" to finish him off.

whidbey: Headso: What is good about Romney is that his is not that far to the right of Obama and he won't have the luxury of left wing apologists when he tramples people's rights or laughs at the "people on the internet" who want to legalize weed. We'd probably end up with less right wing polices with a republican president with liberal democrats back on their game instead of in lick obama taint mode.

Sorry, but that doesn't sound "good" to me. I'd rather criticize Obama heavily for NDAA and other Bush-related fallout than toss out an otherwise favorable administration and its policies, which you're clearly not admitting has produced accomplishments.

My contention is you'd have 100% of liberal democrats vehemently opposed to something like NDAA in a world where Romney was in office, I think it would be an issue much bigger than it was with Obama signing it and it is possible things might have worked out differently. If you are trying to say you have not seen democrat apologia on fark regarding that issue you are lying.

Majority of conservatives don't not absolutely hate Mitt Romney, more than likely anyway. At least when push comes to shove, he's OK. Not a flesh eating virus or anything

That's ok. We only need a small percentage of the real nut jobs to hate him and stay home the day of the general election.

NDAA was set up to be damn near impossible to shut down. Bush left Iraq and Gitmo as traps for the next administration.

DarnoKonrad: Carth: I'm really hoping Romney wins with under 35% tonight. Romney 35 Paul and Huntman around 20 would be good

I really hope he wraps it up tonight and everybody else drops out. The sooner the general election starts, the sooner Romney can get to grenading his own campaign. It's not going to take very many "I like firing people" and "corporations are people too" to finish him off.

Most of the field save Huntsman is basically ceding New Hampshire and making their stands in South Carolina and Florida. Gingrich in particular's set to unload on Romney down there.

Besides, the longer the primary lasts, the longer Obama can sit back and let the Republicans do his dirty work for him.

DarnoKonrad: Carth: I'm really hoping Romney wins with under 35% tonight. Romney 35 Paul and Huntman around 20 would be good

I really hope he wraps it up tonight and everybody else drops out. The sooner the general election starts, the sooner Romney can get to grenading his own campaign. It's not going to take very many "I like firing people" and "corporations are people too" to finish him off.

Pretty much this. The other Republicans are using all the ammo that the Democratic party has spent years building up! It's not fair. It's much more fun to sit back and watch Romney slowly hoist himself on his own petard.

Headso: whidbey: Headso: What is good about Romney is that his is not that far to the right of Obama and he won't have the luxury of left wing apologists when he tramples people's rights or laughs at the "people on the internet" who want to legalize weed. We'd probably end up with less right wing polices with a republican president with liberal democrats back on their game instead of in lick obama taint mode.

Sorry, but that doesn't sound "good" to me. I'd rather criticize Obama heavily for NDAA and other Bush-related fallout than toss out an otherwise favorable administration and its policies, which you're clearly not admitting has produced accomplishments.

My contention is you'd have 100% of liberal democrats vehemently opposed to something like NDAA in a world where Romney was in office, I think it would be an issue much bigger than it was with Obama signing it and it is possible things might have worked out differently. If you are trying to say you have not seen democrat apologia on fark regarding that issue you are lying.

You know, because Democrats were such a pinnacle of idealist obstructionism under President Bush.

So it begins. The GOP establishment realizes it has to tell the rank and file that they've always supported Romney. By Florida, they will be on the talk shows saying "listen, we were always backing Romney because it was always going to be Romney."

Headso: My contention is you'd have 100% of liberal democrats vehemently opposed to something like NDAA in a world where Romney was in office, I think it would be an issue much bigger than it was with Obama signing it and it is possible things might have worked out differently. If you are trying to say you have not seen democrat apologia on fark regarding that issue you are lying.

The problem with your logic is this: 100% of liberal democrats were vehemently opposed to NDAA when Obama signed it. There's just not that many of us to being with. And I haven't seen much apologetics for the NDAA. It's been universally condemned. But if it was a Republican signing the thing, he'd make a point of running down 'treasonous' liberals with complete and total media support in doing so.

Headso: whidbey: Headso: What is good about Romney is that his is not that far to the right of Obama and he won't have the luxury of left wing apologists when he tramples people's rights or laughs at the "people on the internet" who want to legalize weed. We'd probably end up with less right wing polices with a republican president with liberal democrats back on their game instead of in lick obama taint mode.

Sorry, but that doesn't sound "good" to me. I'd rather criticize Obama heavily for NDAA and other Bush-related fallout than toss out an otherwise favorable administration and its policies, which you're clearly not admitting has produced accomplishments.

My contention is you'd have 100% of liberal democrats vehemently opposed to something like NDAA in a world where Romney was in office,

Because that totally happened under Bush.

I think it would be an issue much bigger than it was with Obama signing it and it is possible things might have worked out differently. If you are trying to say you have not seen democrat apologia on fark regarding that issue you are lying.

I haven't. Many of my fellow Obama supporters here are either totally so pissed off to the point where they'd not vote for him this year, or they've made some very pointed criticism regarding the move while still pledging support for his other policies.

And it's already a "much bigger" issue. It means that no matter who you get in office, the MIC is what's really controlling this country in terms of foreign policy, not the people, and certainly not our representatives in Congress.

The truth is, it's far more likely we have a chance at changing the policy with a Democrat in office than the far right--in other words, the people who drafted NDAA and shoved it along through Congress like they did PATRIOT.

gshepnyc: So it begins. The GOP establishment realizes it has to tell the rank and file that they've always supported Romney. By Florida, they will be on the talk shows saying "listen, we were always backing Romney because it was always going to be Romney."

I think in the old Soviet Union they used to call that a "180 degree party line shift".

We have never been at war with Eastasia, they have always been our allies, we've been at war with Eurasia.

I've been saying this for what, a year now?

"Conservatives" won't hesitate whatsoever to vote for Romney. And many people, both IRL and here on Fark, were just soooooooo sure that Romney's Mormonism was going to be some kind of scarlet letter which would keep him from getting the nomination and would mean "conservatives" wouldn't vote for him in the general election either.

Which is crap, of course. They don't care who it is... they just are so invested in the marketing that they've been sold, that they'd vote for the dusty bones of Joseph Smith himself so long as he isn't a liberal or a Democrat.

Lost Thought 00: You know, because Democrats were such a pinnacle of idealist obstructionism under President Bush.

Many of the policies passed under W were done in a drunken state of patriotism because he failed at protecting the country that time. I don't think you can compare that with a scenario where the democrats just lost the presidency after a comical level of obstructionism from Republicans, there you'd have democrats just itching for a fight.

Headso: Lost Thought 00: You know, because Democrats were such a pinnacle of idealist obstructionism under President Bush.

Many of the policies passed under W were done in a drunken state of patriotism because he failed at protecting the country that time. I don't think you can compare that with a scenario where the democrats just lost the presidency after a comical level of obstructionism from Republicans, there you'd have democrats just itching for a fight.

Are you STILL arguing this? Or should I put quotes around the word "arguing?"

mongbiohazard: that they'd vote for the dusty bones of Joseph Smith himself

All those gold plates would make him have republican like views on the "death tax".

Headso: whidbey: Headso: What is good about Romney is that his is not that far to the right of Obama and he won't have the luxury of left wing apologists when he tramples people's rights or laughs at the "people on the internet" who want to legalize weed. We'd probably end up with less right wing polices with a republican president with liberal democrats back on their game instead of in lick obama taint mode.

Sorry, but that doesn't sound "good" to me. I'd rather criticize Obama heavily for NDAA and other Bush-related fallout than toss out an otherwise favorable administration and its policies, which you're clearly not admitting has produced accomplishments.

My contention is you'd have 100% of liberal democrats vehemently opposed to something like NDAA in a world where Romney was in office, I think it would be an issue much bigger than it was with Obama signing it and it is possible things might have worked out differently. If you are trying to say you have not seen democrat apologia on fark regarding that issue you are lying.

If we had any sort of powerful caucus of Liberal Democrats, you might have a point.

Instead, we have the rare few left liberals, a lot of middle of the roaders, and then the conservatives and the Blue Dogs that survived 2010.

Most of the democrats in Congress today are moderates or conservatives, not liberals. We would need an overhaul of the Democrats to actually have a liberal power bloc.

The Stealth Hippopotamus: He's not Obama black.

FTFY

Cuz they're big believers in American Acceptablism.

Romney might be a crazy mormon but fartbongo is either a muslim or an atheist which is way worse.

/I'd prefer Santorum, but I'd vote for Romney over fartbongo in a heartbeat.

Tea party/ far right wingers/ social conservatives are finding out they aren't nearly as relevant as they want everyone to believe. Loud and belligerent, but a minority in their own party.

evoke: but I'd vote for Romney over fartbongo in a heartbeat.

Not sure if derping on purpose...

DarnoKonrad: Carth: I'm really hoping Romney wins with under 35% tonight. Romney 35 Paul and Huntman around 20 would be good

I really hope he wraps it up tonight and everybody else drops out. The sooner the general election starts, the sooner Romney can get to grenading his own campaign. It's not going to take very many "I like firing people" and "corporations are people too" to finish him off.

I'm ok with Newt spending millions to tell people how terrible Romney is. The more money Republicans spend attacking him now the more Obama can spend later.

D135: my head doesn't not hurt

Romney don't never not done nothing for not nonebody. Never not no one, didn't about no reason not never. And by God they never not ain't gonna will!

whidbey: evoke: but I'd vote for Romney over fartbongo in a heartbeat.

Not sure if derping on purpose...

Say what you will about Romney, but he has never once either farted or taxed a bongo.

LincolnLogolas: The Stealth Hippopotamus: He's not Obama black blah.

FTFY

FTFY.

improvius: D135: my head doesn't not hurt

Romney don't never not done nothing for not nonebody. Never not no one, didn't about no reason not never. And by God they never not ain't gonna will!

Now who can argue with that? Plus Gaby expressed that in authentic American mountain gibberish.

mahuika: let me remind you that the Teavengalical candidates who were elected in 2010 will still be there.

Well... maybe some. The Tea Party candidates come up for re-election in 2012, and it's a presidential election so turnout will be high. The Tea Party won't be able to single-handedly influence the outcome like they did in 2010. Besides, their approval ratings are dismal. There could very well be a lot of turnover and especially the wingnuttier types may be gone.

A Dark Evil Omen: whidbey: evoke: but I'd vote for Romney over fartbongo in a heartbeat.

Not sure if derping on purpose...

Say what you will about Romney, but he has never once either farted or taxed a bongo.

Yeah but he might play a tax-free bongo while Washington farts.....