It realy is about religion ...

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by tooblue

Analyst said it from the start. I refused to believe it. I do now. Romney's biggest 'real' challenge is his religion.

It is clear that this is how you feel and I will not argue with you about it.

IIRC, a few of us last spring tried to discuss the many struggles Romney would face in the election, his faith being one of them.

[woot]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

It is clear that this is how you feel and I will not argue with you about it.

IIRC, a few of us last spring tried to discuss the many struggles Romney would face in the election, his faith being one of them.

I can't express how much better your old avatar was than your new one.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

IIRC, a few of us last spring tried to discuss the many struggles Romney would face in the election, his faith being one of them.

I know. I didn't often participate. I truly thought that it was not as big an issue and was prepared to wait and see -to put the analist thinking to the test. I now realize it is 'the' issue in regards to Romney and it saddens me.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

Wow, that's one voter they quoted there. Hardly representative nor a majority.

I don't doubt that there exist voters who will not look past his religion. However, I think Romney's real challenge is that he alienates the average Midwest/Southern voter with his lack of charisma, his tremendous wealth, and even his intellect. It's fine to be smart, but you've got to play the part of the regular guy. Look at Obama. He's by any account incredibly intelligent. But he's not afraid to lower his diction and even take on a vernacular accent when necessary. It's fine to be wealthy, but you've got to pretend you're not. Look at Edwards. Tremendously affluent, yet spends all his time talking about saw mills. I honestly don't think Romney's interested in playing the part of the game where you pretend you're an average American. The truth is, the average American just plain doesn't run for president, so you've got an uphill battle convincing us you're one of "us." But if you want to connect with the voters, you've gotta try.

I think these are interesting comments, Barbara, because they don't describe me as a voter at all. I am completely turned off by Edwards' folksy "my father was a mill worker" routine. It strikes me as wholly fake. Obama doesn't strike me as fake in the same way, but when politicians pretend to be something they're not, it's a turn off. See Romney's "lifelong hunter" comment or John Kerry asking, "Is this where I get me a huntin' license?" Give me a break.

I also totally disagree with Huckabee's perspective, voiced to Jay Leno, that Americans are looking more for the guy they work with for President, rather than the guy that laid them off. I don't want any of my co-workers for President. And though I may or may not like my CEO, especially when I've been laid off (which I have), he's the guy creating jobs. I'd like someone at the top who understands business and economics. If our country has come to the point where Americans prefer Joe Blue Collar Worker making the World's Biggest Decisions, God help us.

Yes, the President needs to relate to the common man. But I truly don't understand this obsession with trying to make the common man President. I want the President to be an extraordinary person who has accomplished extraordinary things, because he's going to be faced with extraordinary decisions.

Romney may be a little over-polished, and he may have a bit of a position problem, but I think I could trust him with his finger on The Button, his judgment on Supreme Court nominees, or his hand in the nation's fiscal affairs. John Edwards? Ha.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Tex

Romney may be a little over-polished, and he may have a bit of a position problem, but I think I could trust him with his finger on The Button, his judgment on Supreme Court nominees, or his hand in the nation's fiscal affairs. John Edwards? Ha.

And this is exactly why Americans are rejecting Romney. Because they know that when that time comes, there won't be advisers and focus groups enough to tell him what to do.

McCain has stuck with his unpopular beliefs, and is being rewarded.

Genuineness is very important to Americans. And Romney has not been able to pull off the switcheroo, like some other politicians have.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

McCain has stuck with his unpopular beliefs, and is being rewarded.

Interesting that in your eyes this is a virtue for McCain, yet for Bush it's a vice.

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Genuineness is very important to Americans. And Romney has not been able to pull off the switcheroo, like some other politicians have.

To Barbara's point, I don't think John Edwards has either. I'm not sure Obama so much strikes me as disingenuous, as naive.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by woot

I can't express how much better your old avatar was than your new one.

Really? Wow. Degustibus non est disputandum.
(AA, if I botched that, go easy on me. It's been a while.)

Originally Posted by Tex

I think these are interesting comments, Barbara, because they don't describe me as a voter at all.

I know. I'd wager they don't describe most of us here. You guys have to keep in mind that the average poster here is not the average voter. The average poster here is better educated, higher compensated, more informed, and pays more attention. The average poster here may well be more interested in a candidates views on intervention in Darfur than in what kind of background he comes from. But for many Americans, Darfur is complex and remote. It's easier to stick with the basics. Can the candidate relate to me? If he can, then maybe he'll look out for me and mine.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I know. I'd wager they don't describe most of us here. You guys have to keep in mind that the average poster here is not the average voter. The average poster here is better educated, higher compensated, more informed, and pays more attention. The average poster here may well be more interested in a candidates views on intervention in Darfur than in what kind of background he comes from. But for many Americans, Darfur is complex and remote. It's easier to stick with the basics. Can the candidate relate to me? If he can, then maybe he'll look out for me and mine.

Then as I said, God help us.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Tex

I also totally disagree with Huckabee's perspective, voiced to Jay Leno, that Americans are looking more for the guy they work with for President, rather than the guy that laid them off. I don't want any of my co-workers for President. And though I may or may not like my CEO, especially when I've been laid off (which I have), he's the guy creating jobs. I'd like someone at the top who understands business and economics. If our country has come to the point where Americans prefer Joe Blue Collar Worker making the World's Biggest Decisions, God help us.

Yes, the President needs to relate to the common man. But I truly don't understand this obsession with trying to make the common man President. I want the President to be an extraordinary person who has accomplished extraordinary things, because he's going to be faced with extraordinary decisions.

Re: this discussion, Huckabee let loose with another gem today:

Romney continues to hone in on the economy ... But as the contestants prepare for an evening debate at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton Thursday, Huckabee suggested Romney’s credentials aren’t as helpful to Americans as they seem.

“One needs to look very carefully at exactly what the business record is. If it’s taking companies that are in serious trouble, buy them when they are in pain, selling off their assets then making huge profit off of it, then that’s not something a lot of Americans can relate to, except those that have lost their jobs because of those type of transactions,” he said while campaigning in Fort Lauderdale.

Huh?

How about selecting a Supreme Court nominee, Mike? Can they relate to that?
How about sending the nation to war? Deciding whether or not to drop a nuke? How about that?
How about managing an organization with a $3 trillion budget? That?
How about solving the Israel-Arab conflict? Are ya relating yet, Huck?

Give me a freaking break. This populism crap from Huckabee is nauseating. I don't want Tom Malone, Norm Peterson, and Cliff Clavin running the country, Mike.

I am so glad his day appears to have come and gone. What an idiot.

http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/...-primary-poll/

[woot]

Originally Posted by Tex

Re: this discussion, Huckabee let loose with another gem today:



Huh?

How about selecting a Supreme Court nominee, Mike? Can they relate to that?
How about sending the nation to war? Deciding whether or not to drop a nuke? How about that?
How about managing an organization with a $3 trillion budget? That?
How about solving the Israel-Arab conflict? Are ya relating yet, Huck?

Give me a freaking break. This populism crap from Huckabee is nauseating. I don't want Tom Malone, Norm Peterson, and Cliff Clavin running the country, Mike.

I am so glad his day appears to have come and gone. What an idiot.

http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/...-primary-poll/

Word. I'm hoping he stays in the race because he's so funny, but if he falls out of the race there will be a slight uptick in my faith in the American people.