Get HuskerMax™ on your iPhone. Click here for details. Get tickets for all home and away games here.
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 89

Thread: Santorum, Romney both have edge over Obama

  1. #31
    Antediluvian Abrasiveness
    Sonuvahusker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    40,446
    Quote Originally Posted by huskernut View Post
    I don't know much about Santorum's economic positions. I'm hoping I don't have to do that research because I am certain I prefer Romney and I still expect him to get the nomination. To be clear, my reservations about Santorum are on the social issues at this point, not the economic ones.
    In other words, social issues are a key influencing factor for you. If that's the case, I'd think Obama's social postitions alone would keep you from ever voting for him. They are far more dangerous than Santorum's, and they are damaging to our economy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Seth View Post
    Sonny once again proving that he is the biggest piece of ******** on Huskermax. Congrats on earning this title, sir.
    http://www.timeanddate.com/countdown...+leaves+office

  2. #32
    Guest
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    3,295
    Quote Originally Posted by huskernut View Post
    I understand where you're coming from, and I haven't yet decided I won't vote for Santorum myself, so what I'm about to say is just for discussion.

    My fear, is that if Santorum DOES win the nomination, it is because his party WANTS him to do social issues above economic ones. If it's economic, they would pick Romney. So Santorum will feel a mandate to actually DO something. What he might want to do is likely unacceptable to me.
    This is Romney's to lose. Always has been. Same with the general, imo.

    What Santorum may do is no more acceptable to you than what Obama has done already. But that's not why I would never vote for Obama. Many of the big social moves have their roots in personal governance, imo, and I do not see a President coming in for 4 or 8 years and turning a social tide that has been heading left for decades with the stroke of a pen or an appointment to the SC. That's not as big as many make it out to be.

    The fiscal direction and size and scope of government and it's purpose are what I pay attention to.

  3. #33
    Guest
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    3,295
    Quote Originally Posted by ThotDoc View Post
    I'd vote for Romney over Obama
    I'd vote for Santorum over Obama
    I'd vote for Gingrich over Obama
    I'd vote for Palin over Obama
    I'd vote for Pat Paulsen over Obama
    I'd vote for Huskrthill over Obama
    and yes
    I'd even vote for Red Phoenix over Obama
    Even Obama Girl?

  4. #34
    All Big 10
    huskernut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Louisville, CO
    Posts
    19,637
    On Obama's economic approach: I have defended his stimulus as necessary at the time, with the idea that we would address the deficit after the economy was stabilized. I still think had the stimulus been even bigger, and better designed, it could have stabilized us with lower unemployment. But that's water under the bridge at this point. I feel now we need to address the deficit. I don't think the democratic party has the stones or in some cases even the desire to do it.

    So I strongly prefer a Republic administration that honestly takes the economy as it only task. But if the Republican party gives me a candidate chosen by people far to the right of me on social issues, I am very concerned that the party, and that candidate, will think his real job is that agenda.

    Why don't we just pick the boring but competent guy and get started?
    Moving on...


    Welcome Coach Riley! Go Big Red!!!

  5. #35
    All Big 10
    huskernut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Louisville, CO
    Posts
    19,637
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonuvahusker View Post
    In other words, social issues are a key influencing factor for you. If that's the case, I'd think Obama's social postitions alone would keep you from ever voting for him. They are far more dangerous than Santorum's, and they are damaging to our economy.
    I don't see that.
    Moving on...


    Welcome Coach Riley! Go Big Red!!!

  6. #36
    Guest
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    3,295
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonuvahusker View Post
    In other words, social issues are a key influencing factor for you. If that's the case, I'd think Obama's social postitions alone would keep you from ever voting for him. They are far more dangerous than Santorum's, and they are damaging to our economy.
    I've always thought voting based predominantly on social issues was casting a vote emotionally.

    Thus, $16 trillion and counting as the social debates rage on....

  7. #37
    Husker Immortal
    ThotDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Hagerstown, Maryland
    Posts
    70,287
    To me, the more interesting issue is who Romney picks as a running mate. Pandering to the conservatives alienates the independents he needs to win the election. Pandering to the independents and he risks the conservatives staying home.
    "I firmly believe that any man's finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle - victorious." -- Vince Lombardi


  8. #38
    Moderator
    redmachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    7,656
    Quote Originally Posted by COsker View Post
    I've always thought voting based predominantly on social issues was casting a vote emotionally.

    Thus, $16 trillion and counting as the social debates rage on....
    Correct

    When the country started to vote based on its feelings, we started pooping the bed.

    "It's not personal, Sonny. It's Strictly business." - Michael Corleone
    "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- (Thomas Jefferson)
    “Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you.” -- (Benjamin Franklin)

  9. #39
    God of Huskermax

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Overland Park, KS
    Posts
    58,799
    Quote Originally Posted by COsker View Post
    So it's less about the debt, the spending, the ridiculous hypocritical rhetoric from Obama..it's more about keeping a guy out because you don't like his social views?

    Me personally, I've never wanted to hear one word about social issues from a candidate for President. I don't see that as the biggest job we hire him to do.
    says the guy who started the ShePAC thread.

  10. #40
    God of Huskermax

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Overland Park, KS
    Posts
    58,799
    Quote Originally Posted by huskernut View Post
    On Obama's economic approach: I have defended his stimulus as necessary at the time, with the idea that we would address the deficit after the economy was stabilized. I still think had the stimulus been even bigger, and better designed, it could have stabilized us with lower unemployment. But that's water under the bridge at this point. I feel now we need to address the deficit. I don't think the democratic party has the stones or in some cases even the desire to do it.

    So I strongly prefer a Republic administration that honestly takes the economy as it only task. But if the Republican party gives me a candidate chosen by people far to the right of me on social issues, I am very concerned that the party, and that candidate, will think his real job is that agenda.

    Why don't we just pick the boring but competent guy and get started?
    This is a great post that I think sums up what a vast number of independent voters are thinking in regards to this election.

  11. #41
    All Big 10
    huskernut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Louisville, CO
    Posts
    19,637
    Quote Originally Posted by COsker View Post
    I've always thought voting based predominantly on social issues was casting a vote emotionally.
    I like to think I'm more analytical than emotional in deciding. That's why I'm not ruling Santorum out at this point. I would take a closer look to see what I think would happen.

    But there are clearly millions of Republicans to the right of me on social issues who would, given the chance, only focus on social issues and who don't give a whit about economic ones. Talk about "emotional".
    Moving on...


    Welcome Coach Riley! Go Big Red!!!

  12. #42
    Guest
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    3,295
    Quote Originally Posted by huskernut View Post
    On Obama's economic approach: I have defended his stimulus as necessary at the time, with the idea that we would address the deficit after the economy was stabilized. I still think had the stimulus been even bigger, and better designed, it could have stabilized us with lower unemployment. But that's water under the bridge at this point. I feel now we need to address the deficit. I don't think the democratic party has the stones or in some cases even the desire to do it.
    Quote Originally Posted by huskernut View Post

    So I strongly prefer a Republic administration that honestly takes the economy as it only task. But if the Republican party gives me a candidate chosen by people far to the right of me on social issues, I am very concerned that the party, and that candidate, will think his real job is that agenda.

    Why don't we just pick the boring but competent guy and get started?
    Boring? Hey, who cares? Not everything in life has to be American Idol, does it? Who cares about if he's (Obama) done the job he said--and was elected--to do? The electorate has got to get past this need for the President to be their source of entertainment.

    Many have argued the stimulus was "necessary". What I don't see is a fair analysis of whether it was effective. Did we get everything we paid for. No asking the genie for wishes of more money, just as it was. Did it do what we were told it would do? Did the results match the rhetoric?

    It's amazing to me how many people blow right past the waste and fraud--the boondoggles--of that spending. Our government--left and right--have shown NO ABILITY to spend our tax dollars in an efficient, effective manner. We're big, we're bloated and we're glutens. We also deserve what we get fiscally if we continue to allow elected officials to poor billions into a rat hole, then cheer that unemployment "stayed" at 8.3%. God help us.

    And regardless of whether his supporters want to face it or not, President Obama has precided over record spending and record waste with incredibly underwhelming results. Talk about lower expectations.

    So now, lets lose sleep over contraception and the Church....

  13. #43
    Ayyy!
    huskrthill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Approximately 41° 12' 19" N, 96° 9' 29" W
    Posts
    42,300
    Quote Originally Posted by huskernut View Post
    I understand where you're coming from, and I haven't yet decided I won't vote for Santorum myself, so what I'm about to say is just for discussion.

    My fear, is that if Santorum DOES win the nomination, it is because his party WANTS him to do social issues above economic ones. If it's economic, they would pick Romney. So Santorum will feel a mandate to actually DO something. What he might want to do is likely unacceptable to me.
    You aren't the only one with these concerns, obviously. His 16 years in Congress show that he actually governs quite reasonably.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  14. #44
    Moderator
    redmachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    Northern VA
    Posts
    7,656
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPhoenix View Post
    This is a great post that I think sums up what a vast number of independent voters are thinking in regards to this election.
    I would agree with your feelings. It was a good post.

    It also sums up the feelings of this conservative Republican. At this point, social issues need to take a backseat to fixing the economy and protecting the nation. I don't care how dull the guy is, they could wheel him in on a gurney for all I care, just as long as he can get the job done.
    "The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- (Thomas Jefferson)
    “Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you.” -- (Benjamin Franklin)

  15. #45
    Guest
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    3,295
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPhoenix View Post
    says the guy who started the ShePAC thread.
    I'm sorry, when did Bill Maher announce for President again?







Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •