9 votes

What's worse: a second Obama term or the election of Mitt Romney?

This question has been eating away at me for a little while now.
What's worse? A second Obama term or the election of Mitt Romney?

Before I go into details as to why I question this, let me say this: I know who I advocate and support. I know who I will vote for in November. Paul is my boy til the end.

That being said, there are some interesting points regarding the establishment candidates that I'd like for folks to consider.
"How on EARTH could a 2nd Obama term be a good thing?"
Because Obama policy already has a bad rap. Folks are rapidly catching on to his failed Foreign Policy, his deceitful Drug policies, Fast & Furious, his 'domestic terrorism' liberty-revoking orders, among other things. You can only push this type of platform around for so long, before people get 'mad as hell, and can't take it anymore!'

Now, in the instance Romney is instead elected, no doubt we will see these same policies being followed; only instead under the guise of a new Cabinet. As these policies CONTINUE to fail, we will hear the pro-partisan media declare 'Obama's mess', and how we let the Dems spend too much money.

The truth is, this is OUR mess and it is our responsibility to fix it, not Romney's, not Obama's, not Paul's. I guess to rephrase my questions: Wouldn't the election of Mitt Romney further distract the general populace from the real core issues our nation faces, in the wake of Bush and Obama, and maintain the focus on partisan politics?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

If Obama is reelected

then you can kiss the liberty movement goodby.

Depends

Would you rather smash your thumb with a hammer or with a hammer?

LOL....literally!

great comment.

You people are too optomistic.

When you argue that an Obama reelection will hasten our chance at getting a Liberty President in eight years.

Obama has done a wholesale power grab taking away Consitiutionional rights from us and nullifiying Congress. With little fanfare he just signed a brand new executive order giving himself emergence control over ALL US electronic communications methods. What exactly conistitutes an emergenc, of course, would also be determined by HIM.

It is ONLY due to a provision of the Consitution that Presidential elections are held every four years. If the rest of the Constitution can be ignored, why can't that provision?

Thats traditionally how dictators decide to keep themselves in power for life.

The bottom line is - if Obama is elected to another term - what makes you think we will EVER have a chance to elect a Liberty candidate.

In my opinion..

I think Romney would be at least as bad as Obama. Although, it would probably end up being the same either way.

History proves that

less legislation is passed when opposing parties are in the presidency and congress. Most pundits are saying the rebloodlicans are gonna have a good chance of controlling both houses of congress so if we can't have President Ron Paul, it may be better to have the democrips in the WH. It's still a choice of whether I want a poke in the eye or a punch in the nose.

BigRobOn43rd

Lol

I like it. Whatever cripples the government is the best outcome, haha.

Upon hearing of protest over the healthcare bill Obama proclaimed:

"And that slave who knew his master's will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes."

My bad...that's actually Luke 12:47.

You tell me ...

What's worse ... Drowning in 50 feet of water or drowning in 100 feet of water?

It isn't a choice ...... YOUR STILL GONNA DIE

Ron Paul - Swim to the shores of LIBERTY !!!!!

Life is a sexually transmitted disease with a 100% fatality rate.
Don't Give me Liberty, I'll get up and get it myself!

What's worse

A liberal who is running as a republican, or a liberal who is running as a democrat?

As someone so succinctly put

As someone so succinctly put on another post where I discussed this...

Better the Devil I know than the one I don't

Every time I start to think

Every time I start to think 'Maybe Mitt is a little better than Barack', he says something moronic and completely off the wall that reminds me just how much these two are basically no choice at all.

Asking if Mitt is better than Barack is like asking whether I'd prefer to be punched in the nuts or kicked in the nuts.

The worse the better?

Liberals and Democrats act better when they are in opposition. It would much easier to rally opposition to government policies if Romney were president.

Even if Romney wins...

If Romney wins, America drinks the kool-aid and is lulled back to sleep, the establishment buys some time and America is screwed until 2024, taking into account that Obama may get elected again in 2020 for his final 4 anyway.

If Obama wins in 2012, we currently have the Congress critters to keep him at bay, the people continue waking up and getting pissed off, thus he probably would be a lame duck. Lame ducks are what presidents are supposed to be anyway.

Which of the two do you think the establishment would rather see win?

Respectfully.

The establishment prefers Obama

For his PR skills if for no other reason, Romney carries too much baggage for him to be of much use to them.

If the donations on OpenSecrets are any clue...

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/head2head.php?cycle=2012

It seems those working for Establishment banks perfer Romney.

Those working for big name cooperations and acedemia perfer Obama.

Its as if our choice between the two evils is Big Banks or Big Business running our lives.

fireant's picture

How did congresscritters keep him at bay the last 3 1/2 years?

ACA
NDAA
TSA
you get the picture.

Undo what Wilson did

ACA pisses people off... NDAA

ACA pisses people off...
NDAA pisses people off...
TSA pisses people off...

The vinegar in the water is what is waking People up. Slowly...the sheep are coming to their senses.

Obama get re-elected.....it wakes more people up.

Romney gets elected...and they rejoice, drink the kool-aid, and go back to sleep. Nothing changes.

you get the picture

Some of these were congressional acts

not lead by Obama. Obama is not an activist president in the way Bush was.

fireant's picture

you must be watching a different movie than I

.

Undo what Wilson did

must be.

.

Both horrible.

If Romney got in, the whole world might just give up on us completely, which might actually be a good thing. I suppose you could justify voting for him on those grounds.

Obama = creative destruction

Romney = clueless destruction

Obama will speed up the correction, and we have only 4 more to tolerate as opposed to a potential 8 from Willard.

fireant's picture

Obama is a dictator in waiting.

Just my gut. Don't give him the chance.

Undo what Wilson did

My fear exactly.

Good chance we'll never have another election in the U.S. if he's re-elected.

I couldn't agree more

If RP is not the man, I rather see Obama again. It will bring alienate both left and right and we can continue braking the spell of the two party system that is really one party.

Better Obama with a resistant

Better Obama with a resistant congress than Romney with a "mandate" to drive us off the cliff. I'm beginning to think that for more people to wake up we need a closer glimpse of tyranny, Mittens would only serve as a cover for more while Obama at least gets some political resistance.

First of all Romney does not have the demographics to win

Waste of time to put much energy into thinking he ever could.

If the GOP wants to continue forward and we cannot take control in Tampa Obama will be reelected, but he will be much easier to impeach than Romney.

I'd have to say Romney would be much worse at this point for the fact that he could do an about face just like Obama did and could get away with it for about 3-6 months before he sends the world into an economic spin to hell.

Primary Numbers: The GOP Candidates and the National Debt
February 23, 2012

The Committee For A Responsible Federal Budget
http://crfb.org/document/primary-numbers-gop-candidates-and-...

It's not my fault, I voted for Ron Paul in 2008 : )

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul

Thanks...

Thanks for posting the link - hadn't seen this before.

When the American spirit was in its youth, the language of America was different: Liberty, sir, was the primary object. - Patrick Henry

The thing that kills me is that RonPaul2012.com

did not have that stickied to the front page as a permanent post and used those figures in a campaign ad AND that Ron Paul didn't integrate it into his campaign speeches across the country for laymen.

I guess it didn't pass the Trygve/Benton muster.

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul

fireant's picture

Another factor for Romney

Continue churning the WH into one-termers until we get who we want.
Just my opinion, but I think many on this thread are not fully considering the fact that the O adm is entrenched and well oiled. His second term will be far worse.
On the other hand, Mitt will have to spend lots of energy and time, just like any new adm, to get organized.
Churn the WH.
Don't give OBarry the oppotunity to bare his teeth.

Undo what Wilson did