If the final election were today

[NorCal Cat]

Originally Posted by woot

Either way, he absolutely is running on a platform that is the complete opposite of the platform that got him elected in MA. If, as you claim, he did it even while governor there, that seems even worse. Pander to get elected, decide not to run for a second term, then do whatever the hell you want, regardless of your constituency.

OK fine, what's completely opposite from his platform then compared to now? (Besides abortion)

[MikeWaters]

11 of 19 who voted GOP voted for Romney.

Yes, it is true I think that Mormons will support Romney in a disproportionate way.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

11 of 19 who voted GOP voted for Romney.

Yes, it is true I think that Mormons will support Romney in a disproportionate way.

Is that a bad thing?

I chose "other".

[Tex]

Interesting that two chose Ron Paul (are you two trying to be funny?) while no one voted for Thompson.

[Clark Addison]

Originally Posted by FMCoug

There is a reason so few senators have been elected President as opposed to Governors. Executive experience matters.

I hear this a lot, but what is the evidence of it? Here'a a list of all Presidents from 1900 onward who had significant executive experience, and those who didn't. I didn't count VP as experience, since there isn't really any power there.

Have Experience
McKinley, T Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson, Coolidge, FDR, Eisenhower, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush II

No Experience
Harding, Hoover, Truman, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, Ford

Bush I could go either way because of his CIA experience, I guess.

If you go back earlier, you could make comparisons between people like Lincoln (none), vs. Johnson (Governer), but the government was so different then that it probably isn't relevant.

I don't look at the list of experienced people and see them as either having better judgment or greater effectiveness. You have Clinton, Reagan, and FDR, but you also have Bush II, Carter, and Taft. On the non-experienced side, you have plenty of people who were able to exert plenty of executive power, without the experience (LBJ, Nixon, Truman).

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by woot

It recently came out that Ron Paul, of all people, rejects evolution. Not only that, but he used the old "It's just a theory" chestnut. No, it's not just a theory, at least not in the way that he's thinking of. I was horribly disappointed by that, so my vote goes to Obama. On the bright side, Paul's ignorance of reality is not nearly as dangerous as Huckabee's, since Huckabee wants to legislate his fantasy, while Paul doesn't want to legislate anything.

who the hades cares about evolution?

[woot]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

who the hades cares about evolution?

Me, apparently.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Clark Addison

I hear this a lot, but what is the evidence of it? Here'a a list of all Presidents from 1900 onward who had significant executive experience, and those who didn't. I didn't count VP as experience, since there isn't really any power there.

Have Experience
McKinley, T Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson, Coolidge, FDR, Eisenhower, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush II

No Experience
Harding, Hoover, Truman, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, Ford

Bush I could go either way because of his CIA experience, I guess.

If you go back earlier, you could make comparisons between people like Lincoln (none), vs. Johnson (Governer), but the government was so different then that it probably isn't relevant.

I don't look at the list of experienced people and see them as either having better judgment or greater effectiveness. You have Clinton, Reagan, and FDR, but you also have Bush II, Carter, and Taft. On the non-experienced side, you have plenty of people who were able to exert plenty of executive power, without the experience (LBJ, Nixon, Truman).

I agree. We had this argument a few times before...

http://cougarguard.com/forum/showpos...8&postcount=64

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I agree. We had this argument a few times before...

http://cougarguard.com/forum/showpos...8&postcount=64

I think we need some numbers next to those names. Why not list, with each president and his level of executive experience, the size of the federal government in dollars, number of employees, and number of agencies?

Carter cheated on his resume, by the way. The man was no executive.

[RC Vikings]

I would vote for Huck just to see if he could get the flat tax passed. Also need to break the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton cycle. I thought I was posting on the Clinton or Huck thread. I would vote for Romney.