Your endorsements

Your endorsements November 5, 2012

We here at the Cranach Institute endorse no political candidates.  Hey, we even shot down the mythological Wise Turk.  But you can make endorsements of your own.   Who gets your vote tomorrow on election day?  Give your endorsement and your reasoning in the comments.  Maybe you can sway someone who is undecided or who is still at this late date persuadable, thereby turning the election in the event of another one so close that it will hinge on a hanging chad.

"Isn't this another Russian talking point? Remember when the right used to be against this. ..."

We Are in a State of ..."
"THE only way SCOTUS will throw it out is by the 5 conservatives deliberately breaking ..."

We Are in a State of ..."
"YOU are ABSOLUTELY WRONG. WHAT IS OUTRAGEOUS is that neither you nor the madman in ..."

We Are in a State of ..."
"I said that words "gracious will" in the sentence "The foreknowledge of God (praescientia) foresees ..."

Pope Says God Wills the Diversity ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Evangelical
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Pete

    Romney. More “presidential” of the two. More aligned with what I would consider to be the scope of government. Gives more lip service to the correct views on social issues. Hasn’t (yet) fouled up the economy, as has his counterpart. Has, in the past, been very successful in some rather ambitious endeavors – his investment business, the Olympics and governing Massachusetts – as opposed to his opponent whose only successes have been becoming the first African-American president and ramming through a controversial and, for the most part, unpopular health care bill.

  • Pete

    Romney. More “presidential” of the two. More aligned with what I would consider to be the scope of government. Gives more lip service to the correct views on social issues. Hasn’t (yet) fouled up the economy, as has his counterpart. Has, in the past, been very successful in some rather ambitious endeavors – his investment business, the Olympics and governing Massachusetts – as opposed to his opponent whose only successes have been becoming the first African-American president and ramming through a controversial and, for the most part, unpopular health care bill.

  • The wise Turk comment should never be shot down. If he said it, or not.

    It’s a perfect example of the two Kingdoms doctrine.

    What we do here is law. We must do it. But it is never to be tied to what God has done for us in Christ Jesus.

    __

    So, I don’t care how many pairs of holy underwear Romney has…I’m voting for him, lest we get 4 more years of un-American ideals and a quicker road to the end of the “great experiment”.

  • The wise Turk comment should never be shot down. If he said it, or not.

    It’s a perfect example of the two Kingdoms doctrine.

    What we do here is law. We must do it. But it is never to be tied to what God has done for us in Christ Jesus.

    __

    So, I don’t care how many pairs of holy underwear Romney has…I’m voting for him, lest we get 4 more years of un-American ideals and a quicker road to the end of the “great experiment”.

  • Michael B.

    Obama. reasoning: less further away from my personal views.

  • Michael B.

    Obama. reasoning: less further away from my personal views.

  • Romney for president. Beyond that, I’m probably going to be voting for a LOT of libertarians.

  • Romney for president. Beyond that, I’m probably going to be voting for a LOT of libertarians.

  • nativetxn

    Voted for Romney. Not that I agree with everything he says, but he seems to be the only one who realizes that the national debt is way too big-hopefully he can do something about it if elected. I’ll have to say, that, unhappily, I think Obama will be reelected.

  • nativetxn

    Voted for Romney. Not that I agree with everything he says, but he seems to be the only one who realizes that the national debt is way too big-hopefully he can do something about it if elected. I’ll have to say, that, unhappily, I think Obama will be reelected.

  • Booklover

    I didn’t vote “for” somebody as much as “Against” Obama. His HHS mandate was the last straw.

    “No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority.”

    –Thomas Jefferson

  • Booklover

    I didn’t vote “for” somebody as much as “Against” Obama. His HHS mandate was the last straw.

    “No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority.”

    –Thomas Jefferson

  • Trey

    Boo lover is right on. I voted for Romney because he will protect the weakest among us and will protect religious liberty. One should vote with the Golden Rule in mind,e.g., do to others as you would want them to do to you.

  • Trey

    Boo lover is right on. I voted for Romney because he will protect the weakest among us and will protect religious liberty. One should vote with the Golden Rule in mind,e.g., do to others as you would want them to do to you.

  • CRB

    Ditto Booklover and Thomas Jefferson!

  • CRB

    Ditto Booklover and Thomas Jefferson!

  • Norman Teigen

    I am voting for the re-election of President Barack Obama. I think that the Affordable Care Act is a wise piece of public policy. I recognize that many, including conservative Lutherans who should know better, have perpetuated the lie that the President’s action is a threat to religious freedom. Romney does not relate well to the common people. Romney has been caught in many lies. Romney may not be beholden to the extreme right wing, but I fear the Influence of the Tea Party.

    Vote Obama and Biden

    Norman Teigen, Layman
    Evangelical Lutheran Synod

  • Norman Teigen

    I am voting for the re-election of President Barack Obama. I think that the Affordable Care Act is a wise piece of public policy. I recognize that many, including conservative Lutherans who should know better, have perpetuated the lie that the President’s action is a threat to religious freedom. Romney does not relate well to the common people. Romney has been caught in many lies. Romney may not be beholden to the extreme right wing, but I fear the Influence of the Tea Party.

    Vote Obama and Biden

    Norman Teigen, Layman
    Evangelical Lutheran Synod

  • CRB

    Norman Teigen,
    You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I think you have missed something re: “Romney has been caught in many lies.”
    That something is what Scripture says, “All men are liars.” And that includes the POTUS.

  • CRB

    Norman Teigen,
    You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I think you have missed something re: “Romney has been caught in many lies.”
    That something is what Scripture says, “All men are liars.” And that includes the POTUS.

  • Brenda Bomberger

    Voted for Romney, and will be surprised if he gets it.

  • Brenda Bomberger

    Voted for Romney, and will be surprised if he gets it.

  • Spaulding

    Planning to vote for Mickey Mouse neither candidate impresses me. Obama will probably win re-election easily.

  • Spaulding

    Planning to vote for Mickey Mouse neither candidate impresses me. Obama will probably win re-election easily.

  • Jimmy Veith

    I already voted for Obama.

    I agree with Norman @ 9. As a bankruptcy lawyer, I have observed from the street level how broken our current health insurance system is, and I believe that “Obama Care” will go a long way in solving many of the problems in our health care system.

    In addition, I would add these points:

    1. Obama did what was necessary to save the automobile industry.

    2. The economic stimulus and other actions done in the first year of his administration kept the economy from sliding into another great depression.

    3. Most of the major non-partisan groups that have studied what needs to be done to reduce the national debt have concluded that it will take a combination of a reduction in expenditures, entitlement reform and tax increases. Obama is willing to do all three. Romney proposes to extend the Bush tax cuts and reduce rates by 20%, and add two trillion to the national defense budget. His proposal does not add up, and would only add to the national debt.

    4. Obama will not convert Medicare to a voucher system, which would be disastrous.

    In short, Obama will pursue policies that will strengthen the middle class which will be good for everybody and most businesses. A strong middle class increases demand for goods and services, which is the ultimate driver for business expansion. Romney will go back to the supply side – trickle down economics that proved to be a failure during the Bush administration and caused the 2008 recession.

  • Jimmy Veith

    I already voted for Obama.

    I agree with Norman @ 9. As a bankruptcy lawyer, I have observed from the street level how broken our current health insurance system is, and I believe that “Obama Care” will go a long way in solving many of the problems in our health care system.

    In addition, I would add these points:

    1. Obama did what was necessary to save the automobile industry.

    2. The economic stimulus and other actions done in the first year of his administration kept the economy from sliding into another great depression.

    3. Most of the major non-partisan groups that have studied what needs to be done to reduce the national debt have concluded that it will take a combination of a reduction in expenditures, entitlement reform and tax increases. Obama is willing to do all three. Romney proposes to extend the Bush tax cuts and reduce rates by 20%, and add two trillion to the national defense budget. His proposal does not add up, and would only add to the national debt.

    4. Obama will not convert Medicare to a voucher system, which would be disastrous.

    In short, Obama will pursue policies that will strengthen the middle class which will be good for everybody and most businesses. A strong middle class increases demand for goods and services, which is the ultimate driver for business expansion. Romney will go back to the supply side – trickle down economics that proved to be a failure during the Bush administration and caused the 2008 recession.

  • The giant, wasteful, corrupt government is the place to look to fix any ill’s in the private sector.

    How much has the postal service lost this year?

    How about all that great service at your local Motor Vehicle Dept.?

    Bigger govt. means bigger waste, bigger fraud, and entrenched poor service.

    All of you advocates of govt. run healthcare system will find out. Hopefully it’s not the hard way.

    Big govt. means smaller freedom.

  • The giant, wasteful, corrupt government is the place to look to fix any ill’s in the private sector.

    How much has the postal service lost this year?

    How about all that great service at your local Motor Vehicle Dept.?

    Bigger govt. means bigger waste, bigger fraud, and entrenched poor service.

    All of you advocates of govt. run healthcare system will find out. Hopefully it’s not the hard way.

    Big govt. means smaller freedom.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    CTB, Norman: As to lying politicians – if one looks at the fact/reality checkers, many of those “lies” are not so much outright lying as they are partial truths, or very open to interpretation, or spin, or just reductio’s. It is a game.

    Another curious phenomenon I’ve seen is a multitude of “Don’t vote for the lesser of 2 evils”. Now, unless that is part of a concise argument for a specific Third-Party candidate, it is a fairly stupid argument. Because all the candidates are evil to some extent – God isn’t on the ballot. So, the lesser of j evils, j=1,…,n, n being the number of options on the ballot (and write-ins where appropriate) is an entirely acceptable voting strategy.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    CTB, Norman: As to lying politicians – if one looks at the fact/reality checkers, many of those “lies” are not so much outright lying as they are partial truths, or very open to interpretation, or spin, or just reductio’s. It is a game.

    Another curious phenomenon I’ve seen is a multitude of “Don’t vote for the lesser of 2 evils”. Now, unless that is part of a concise argument for a specific Third-Party candidate, it is a fairly stupid argument. Because all the candidates are evil to some extent – God isn’t on the ballot. So, the lesser of j evils, j=1,…,n, n being the number of options on the ballot (and write-ins where appropriate) is an entirely acceptable voting strategy.

  • Steve Billingsley

    The only politicians I can actually endorse are ones that I actually know. And for myself at least, that only covers people that run for offices like city council seats, school board seats, etc. There are a few that I can happily endorse, but I doubt that anyone would recognize their names.

    As to the rest, I may vote for them based upon the information that is available to me (which is really all they want from me anyway) – but the good news is that we have a system that if they disappoint – I can try and vote them out the next round.

  • Steve Billingsley

    The only politicians I can actually endorse are ones that I actually know. And for myself at least, that only covers people that run for offices like city council seats, school board seats, etc. There are a few that I can happily endorse, but I doubt that anyone would recognize their names.

    As to the rest, I may vote for them based upon the information that is available to me (which is really all they want from me anyway) – but the good news is that we have a system that if they disappoint – I can try and vote them out the next round.

  • Jon

    Jimmy @13,

    As a bankruptcy lawyer voting for Obama, you are voting for your job security!

    Nuff said.

  • Jon

    Jimmy @13,

    As a bankruptcy lawyer voting for Obama, you are voting for your job security!

    Nuff said.

  • Attention all you who are planning to cast a vote for Obama:

    Do you not have any moral qualms with voting for a candidate who, as a US Senator representing Illinois, voted against legislation that would have protected infants who survive
    botched abortions?

    If a candidate supported the right of a mother to end the life of her toddler, would you vote for him under the guise of “not being a single-issue voter”? Then why would you vote for a candidate who supports the right of a mother to end the life of her unborn baby?

  • Attention all you who are planning to cast a vote for Obama:

    Do you not have any moral qualms with voting for a candidate who, as a US Senator representing Illinois, voted against legislation that would have protected infants who survive
    botched abortions?

    If a candidate supported the right of a mother to end the life of her toddler, would you vote for him under the guise of “not being a single-issue voter”? Then why would you vote for a candidate who supports the right of a mother to end the life of her unborn baby?

  • Jimmy Veith

    To Jon @ 13. I thought I would receive accolades for voting for the good of the country rather than my own economic interest. Guess not.

  • Jimmy Veith

    To Jon @ 13. I thought I would receive accolades for voting for the good of the country rather than my own economic interest. Guess not.

  • I will vote for Romney, because Jesus isn’t on the ballot, so the lesser of evils that actually has a chance of beating the greatest of evils is the best strategy, in my opinion.

    Uncle Jimmy @13 has observed “how broken our current health insurance system is,” and thinks that Obama Care is the answer. I disagree. The current state of health care “insurance” is due in no small part to government meddling over the last many decades. There are already too many middlemen between doctor and patient, and a massive new bureaucracy piling on even more byzantine regulations isn’t going to help. If the government would step aside and let people shop with their own dollars for their health care provision and insurance options, free market competition would bring down the cost of health care drastically. Instead, we are stuck with whatever plan our employers foist upon us, because government incentivizes employer-provided health care.

  • I will vote for Romney, because Jesus isn’t on the ballot, so the lesser of evils that actually has a chance of beating the greatest of evils is the best strategy, in my opinion.

    Uncle Jimmy @13 has observed “how broken our current health insurance system is,” and thinks that Obama Care is the answer. I disagree. The current state of health care “insurance” is due in no small part to government meddling over the last many decades. There are already too many middlemen between doctor and patient, and a massive new bureaucracy piling on even more byzantine regulations isn’t going to help. If the government would step aside and let people shop with their own dollars for their health care provision and insurance options, free market competition would bring down the cost of health care drastically. Instead, we are stuck with whatever plan our employers foist upon us, because government incentivizes employer-provided health care.

  • Jimmy Veith

    To Mike @ 20:

    Private insurance companies are obligated to their stock holders to maximize their profits. This is the way free market capitalism works.

    My question for you is this: How many private insurance companies will choose to insure people with a pre-existing medical condition? The answer is none, unless they are required to do so by the government. In my opinion, this is a proper role for government; ie, to make broken markets work for the general welfare of the people.

  • Jimmy Veith

    To Mike @ 20:

    Private insurance companies are obligated to their stock holders to maximize their profits. This is the way free market capitalism works.

    My question for you is this: How many private insurance companies will choose to insure people with a pre-existing medical condition? The answer is none, unless they are required to do so by the government. In my opinion, this is a proper role for government; ie, to make broken markets work for the general welfare of the people.

  • DonS

    I read Jimmy’s comment @ 13 and thought exactly what Jon said @ 17 😉 .

    We are seeing another example, in New Jersey and New York City, of the inefficacy of big government. Neighbors helping neighbors is how those impacted by Sandy are getting by, to the extent that they are. No thanks to government, particularly in NYC, where Nanny Bloomberg blithely told the citizens not to worry about the storm and then wanted the marathon to go on yesterday. A pathetic demonstration of how little government really cares about the individual.

    If Obama is re-elected, Obamacare is a done deal. We will all get “Hurricane Sandy” -type health care — they’ll let us have treatment when (if) they get to us. If Obama is re-elected, we get a left-wing Supreme Court and a left-wing federal judiciary. The HHS mandates will likely become law, Roe v. Wade will be ensconced as constitutional law for all of our lifetimes, and our individual liberties will be at great risk, in favor of aggressive statism. Obama will be unrestrained by any sense that he has to be re-elected.

    Our kids will be saddled with a $20 trillion debt by the end of his second term.

    America will be forever changed, and not for the better.

  • DonS

    I read Jimmy’s comment @ 13 and thought exactly what Jon said @ 17 😉 .

    We are seeing another example, in New Jersey and New York City, of the inefficacy of big government. Neighbors helping neighbors is how those impacted by Sandy are getting by, to the extent that they are. No thanks to government, particularly in NYC, where Nanny Bloomberg blithely told the citizens not to worry about the storm and then wanted the marathon to go on yesterday. A pathetic demonstration of how little government really cares about the individual.

    If Obama is re-elected, Obamacare is a done deal. We will all get “Hurricane Sandy” -type health care — they’ll let us have treatment when (if) they get to us. If Obama is re-elected, we get a left-wing Supreme Court and a left-wing federal judiciary. The HHS mandates will likely become law, Roe v. Wade will be ensconced as constitutional law for all of our lifetimes, and our individual liberties will be at great risk, in favor of aggressive statism. Obama will be unrestrained by any sense that he has to be re-elected.

    Our kids will be saddled with a $20 trillion debt by the end of his second term.

    America will be forever changed, and not for the better.

  • Jon H.

    I endorse the president, for many of the reasons given by Jimmy and Norman. On a personal level, I’ve been very pleased to see how Obama’s presidency has involved in politics so many more women, Latinos, and African Americans.

  • Jon H.

    I endorse the president, for many of the reasons given by Jimmy and Norman. On a personal level, I’ve been very pleased to see how Obama’s presidency has involved in politics so many more women, Latinos, and African Americans.

  • helen

    Pete @ 1
    Hasn’t (yet) fouled up the economy, as has his counterpart.

    I suspect the people whose jobs and pensions were sucked up and deposited in the Cayman Islands might have another point of view on that.
    I submit that the same thieves who are bankrolling both Romney and Obama fouled up the economy before Obama became President, and have yet to be indicted for it.
    [The lone exception being Madok, who stole from fellow Jews. Not done! Stealing from the rest of the world is OK, even commendable; you get bonuses for that.]
    Do you think a Romney administration will bring any of them to justice? Yeah, right! It was legal thievery… like Romney’s tax payments.

  • helen

    Pete @ 1
    Hasn’t (yet) fouled up the economy, as has his counterpart.

    I suspect the people whose jobs and pensions were sucked up and deposited in the Cayman Islands might have another point of view on that.
    I submit that the same thieves who are bankrolling both Romney and Obama fouled up the economy before Obama became President, and have yet to be indicted for it.
    [The lone exception being Madok, who stole from fellow Jews. Not done! Stealing from the rest of the world is OK, even commendable; you get bonuses for that.]
    Do you think a Romney administration will bring any of them to justice? Yeah, right! It was legal thievery… like Romney’s tax payments.

  • helen

    nativetxn @ 5
    seems to be the only one who realizes that the national debt is way too big-

    Sure he does! That’s why he’s going to pay his taxes at 35% next year, along with everyone in his bracket!

  • helen

    nativetxn @ 5
    seems to be the only one who realizes that the national debt is way too big-

    Sure he does! That’s why he’s going to pay his taxes at 35% next year, along with everyone in his bracket!

  • helen

    Steve Martin @ 14
    How much has the postal service lost this year?
    How about all that great service at your local Motor Vehicle Dept.?

    I don’t believe the Postal Service lost anything on its operations.
    Its problem is a congressional requirement about its pension system that is unrealistic.
    The service at my local Motor Vehicle Dept is great, thank you!

  • helen

    Steve Martin @ 14
    How much has the postal service lost this year?
    How about all that great service at your local Motor Vehicle Dept.?

    I don’t believe the Postal Service lost anything on its operations.
    Its problem is a congressional requirement about its pension system that is unrealistic.
    The service at my local Motor Vehicle Dept is great, thank you!

  • helen

    collinsmo @ 18
    Then why would you vote for a candidate who supports the right of a mother to end the life of her unborn baby?

    There’s the rub! And that is why I have not been able to vote for Democrats for years. 🙁 And now there is the HHS mandate which is an “in your face” defiance of the constitutional protections for religious liberty (including expression “outside one’s own home”).

    Sorry so many of you invited response. I’ll stop now. 🙂

  • helen

    collinsmo @ 18
    Then why would you vote for a candidate who supports the right of a mother to end the life of her unborn baby?

    There’s the rub! And that is why I have not been able to vote for Democrats for years. 🙁 And now there is the HHS mandate which is an “in your face” defiance of the constitutional protections for religious liberty (including expression “outside one’s own home”).

    Sorry so many of you invited response. I’ll stop now. 🙂

  • DonS
  • DonS
  • BS in Texas

    Romney is the wise Turk in this contest. He got my early vote!

    Don’t rightly know how a person could listen to anything BHO has said in the last month and think he has the moral countenance to lead such a nation as ours. A leader accepts responsibility for his or her shortcomings and mistakes…BHO admits to none and accepts no responsibility for the failures of the last four years. Don’t want to hear that? Just think about the families of those four Americans that died in Libya. Obama is no leader.

  • BS in Texas

    Romney is the wise Turk in this contest. He got my early vote!

    Don’t rightly know how a person could listen to anything BHO has said in the last month and think he has the moral countenance to lead such a nation as ours. A leader accepts responsibility for his or her shortcomings and mistakes…BHO admits to none and accepts no responsibility for the failures of the last four years. Don’t want to hear that? Just think about the families of those four Americans that died in Libya. Obama is no leader.

  • Jon H.

    The mythical “wise Turk” that Lutherans reference … Explain it to me. Isn’t the Turk “wise” only because he’s thoroughly indifferent to his religion? I mean, would he be “wise” if he sought to govern by Islamic law?

    Applied to Romney, is the point that Romney is acceptable because his mormonism is irrelevant to how he governs? How do you know that? He’s said it’s the most important aspect of his life.

    There are plenty of reasons to vote for or against Romney. But to vote for him because he’s a “wise Turk” (e.g., a thorough secularist) seems strange.

  • Jon H.

    The mythical “wise Turk” that Lutherans reference … Explain it to me. Isn’t the Turk “wise” only because he’s thoroughly indifferent to his religion? I mean, would he be “wise” if he sought to govern by Islamic law?

    Applied to Romney, is the point that Romney is acceptable because his mormonism is irrelevant to how he governs? How do you know that? He’s said it’s the most important aspect of his life.

    There are plenty of reasons to vote for or against Romney. But to vote for him because he’s a “wise Turk” (e.g., a thorough secularist) seems strange.

  • JunkerGeorg

    Idealism in terms of how things ‘should’ be ends up being nothing more than a fart in the wind if not grounded in realism in terms of what things might be possible. Perhaps much to the surprise and disappointment of some constitutional purists here who like me do not like the statist establishment who’ve been running the Republican party (and running down certain guiding idealogical principles in favor of the pragmatics of power), alas, I plan on casting my vote for…….Mitt Romney. (after which I may gag at what I felt I had to do.)

    My rationale for voting for Romney may not be perfect, but here it is: It’s not that I think that Romney is so great, but that I think Obama is so bad in terms of his ideology, along with his present policies and even more so his potential future policies, which will continue the trend towards more restrictions on religious and political liberties, all done under the pretense of claiming to offer more “security”(e.g., Patriot Act, SOPA, etc.). For example, I am very concerned about this talk of increased regulations of the Internet. Given our tv/radio media is controlled by corporate entities standing behind one party or the other (or both), the only other feasible outlet for the free expression/communication of alternative ideas to status quo is the internet. Curtail that with “fairness” laws, as things like the radio to some extent were before Reagan came into office, and it is just one more step to tyranny and more walls put up over/against reform, that is, democratic reform that is inspired and caused by enlightenment through the free sharing of ideas/principles. No doubt, I will sound like a paranoid conspiracy theorist to Obama supporters here, but whatever. I do think the lessons taught throughout history when you trade in liberty for supposedly more security in return do have some value (e.g., Germany in the 1930’s).

    So yes, I admittedly am not casting my vote “for” Romney, but casting it “against” Obama. Were the Democrat’s candidate for POTUS more of a centrist in policies like Clinton tended to be, largely due to his “Polonius” (i.e., Dick Morris), then I could see how disenfranchised and disenchanted “small r” Republicans like myself might opt to cast a vote for a 3rd party candidate so as to shake up the statist Republican establishment and send a message that they need to respect and at least be willing to discuss certain issues/policies which smaller groups within the Republican tent think need to be addressed, rather than unfairly villifying and intentionally miscasting us as being raving “liberaltarians” or racist “teabaggers”. Yet given how extreme to the left Obama is, there may be no chance of reform of any party back to constitutional restraints should this man be given another 4 years in office. After all, once legislation is passed and the government is increased, it becomes almost impossible to tear it down.

    Again, realism must rule here. No doubt, I will have a bucket on hand after I cast my vote for Romney. And should he get elected, I will be the first to criticize him during his presidency when/where I think criticism is warranted, while praying for him in Divine Service as I do the current president.

  • JunkerGeorg

    Idealism in terms of how things ‘should’ be ends up being nothing more than a fart in the wind if not grounded in realism in terms of what things might be possible. Perhaps much to the surprise and disappointment of some constitutional purists here who like me do not like the statist establishment who’ve been running the Republican party (and running down certain guiding idealogical principles in favor of the pragmatics of power), alas, I plan on casting my vote for…….Mitt Romney. (after which I may gag at what I felt I had to do.)

    My rationale for voting for Romney may not be perfect, but here it is: It’s not that I think that Romney is so great, but that I think Obama is so bad in terms of his ideology, along with his present policies and even more so his potential future policies, which will continue the trend towards more restrictions on religious and political liberties, all done under the pretense of claiming to offer more “security”(e.g., Patriot Act, SOPA, etc.). For example, I am very concerned about this talk of increased regulations of the Internet. Given our tv/radio media is controlled by corporate entities standing behind one party or the other (or both), the only other feasible outlet for the free expression/communication of alternative ideas to status quo is the internet. Curtail that with “fairness” laws, as things like the radio to some extent were before Reagan came into office, and it is just one more step to tyranny and more walls put up over/against reform, that is, democratic reform that is inspired and caused by enlightenment through the free sharing of ideas/principles. No doubt, I will sound like a paranoid conspiracy theorist to Obama supporters here, but whatever. I do think the lessons taught throughout history when you trade in liberty for supposedly more security in return do have some value (e.g., Germany in the 1930’s).

    So yes, I admittedly am not casting my vote “for” Romney, but casting it “against” Obama. Were the Democrat’s candidate for POTUS more of a centrist in policies like Clinton tended to be, largely due to his “Polonius” (i.e., Dick Morris), then I could see how disenfranchised and disenchanted “small r” Republicans like myself might opt to cast a vote for a 3rd party candidate so as to shake up the statist Republican establishment and send a message that they need to respect and at least be willing to discuss certain issues/policies which smaller groups within the Republican tent think need to be addressed, rather than unfairly villifying and intentionally miscasting us as being raving “liberaltarians” or racist “teabaggers”. Yet given how extreme to the left Obama is, there may be no chance of reform of any party back to constitutional restraints should this man be given another 4 years in office. After all, once legislation is passed and the government is increased, it becomes almost impossible to tear it down.

    Again, realism must rule here. No doubt, I will have a bucket on hand after I cast my vote for Romney. And should he get elected, I will be the first to criticize him during his presidency when/where I think criticism is warranted, while praying for him in Divine Service as I do the current president.

  • I have to agree with John H here.
    The other day I was reading on Julian the Apostate, and I have to say that scenario gives me a few qualms when I think of Romney.
    I won’t vote republican this year. Republicans don’t have a man on the ballot. The LDS does. It is a political machine, a political party, and it is not in line with the Republican platform. They have their own agenda. They are liars. Romney lied when he said his “church” knew it’s sphere, and he knew his. Living in Utah it is painfully obvious these people know nothing of a separation of church and state.
    So I’m going to vote for the guy who wants to legalize pot. I know to whom my electoral vote will go. I know this will have greater consequences on my life here in Utah than it will for the rest of you. My only hope is that it becomes so bad it creates a backfire situation.
    This whole “Wise Turk” thing is really a sham. Luther didn’t believe there was such a thing as a wise Turk.

  • I have to agree with John H here.
    The other day I was reading on Julian the Apostate, and I have to say that scenario gives me a few qualms when I think of Romney.
    I won’t vote republican this year. Republicans don’t have a man on the ballot. The LDS does. It is a political machine, a political party, and it is not in line with the Republican platform. They have their own agenda. They are liars. Romney lied when he said his “church” knew it’s sphere, and he knew his. Living in Utah it is painfully obvious these people know nothing of a separation of church and state.
    So I’m going to vote for the guy who wants to legalize pot. I know to whom my electoral vote will go. I know this will have greater consequences on my life here in Utah than it will for the rest of you. My only hope is that it becomes so bad it creates a backfire situation.
    This whole “Wise Turk” thing is really a sham. Luther didn’t believe there was such a thing as a wise Turk.

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    I endorse SKP for 2016!

  • Klasie Kraalogies

    I endorse SKP for 2016!

  • Jon

    Well the good thing for Bror is that he’s in Utah. So, at least his vote for whomever else isn’t in a state that would decide anything as to whether the president is re-elected or not. Utah is pretty much in the bag for Romney with or without Bror’s vote. How many Bror-type third party voters (or Grace-type or Todd-type) there are in the pivotal states is what worries me.

    Are there even polls of third party candidates in the pivotal states?

  • Jon

    Well the good thing for Bror is that he’s in Utah. So, at least his vote for whomever else isn’t in a state that would decide anything as to whether the president is re-elected or not. Utah is pretty much in the bag for Romney with or without Bror’s vote. How many Bror-type third party voters (or Grace-type or Todd-type) there are in the pivotal states is what worries me.

    Are there even polls of third party candidates in the pivotal states?

  • If you’re in California, you could vote for Roseanne Barr and Cindy Sheehan. They’re on the “Peace and Freedom” ticket.

  • If you’re in California, you could vote for Roseanne Barr and Cindy Sheehan. They’re on the “Peace and Freedom” ticket.

  • I’m not sure being in Utah is a good thing for me…
    Go tODD!

  • I’m not sure being in Utah is a good thing for me…
    Go tODD!

  • Julian

    Like the bumper sticker says – “Vote Obi-Wan Kenobi: Our Only Hope”

  • Julian

    Like the bumper sticker says – “Vote Obi-Wan Kenobi: Our Only Hope”

  • I think our country would be much better off if more people voted third party. Seriously, you think tomorrow you are going to do the country favors by voting for a man you could care less about? Obama has four years left if he gets elected tomorrow. Romney could have 8. seriously I think republicans would do better to let Obama win tomorrow, and make the republican party think a little harder about who they want to endorse in the next go around.

  • I think our country would be much better off if more people voted third party. Seriously, you think tomorrow you are going to do the country favors by voting for a man you could care less about? Obama has four years left if he gets elected tomorrow. Romney could have 8. seriously I think republicans would do better to let Obama win tomorrow, and make the republican party think a little harder about who they want to endorse in the next go around.

  • Tom Hering

    So Bror, what do you think of the video that’s gone viral the last few days? I was fascinated when Romney said his church takes the position that non-Mormons are free to be pro-choice, but he himself rejects this position, and believes there should be a secular ban on abortion that applies to everybody. In other words, he believes his church is wrong on an issue of secular governance (his church is more liberal than he is), and he’s going to follow his own conviction instead. Are Mormons like American Catholics when it comes to their church’s teachings on social issues?

    http://youtu.be/TxMD02zU9SE

  • Tom Hering

    So Bror, what do you think of the video that’s gone viral the last few days? I was fascinated when Romney said his church takes the position that non-Mormons are free to be pro-choice, but he himself rejects this position, and believes there should be a secular ban on abortion that applies to everybody. In other words, he believes his church is wrong on an issue of secular governance (his church is more liberal than he is), and he’s going to follow his own conviction instead. Are Mormons like American Catholics when it comes to their church’s teachings on social issues?

    http://youtu.be/TxMD02zU9SE

  • Helen K.

    We have already voted for Romney. We don’t think he is a perfect candidate but he is the opposition to what we currently have, an endorser of more federal government involvement in nearly every area of our society. Then there are the issues of abortion, same-sex marriage and last but not least the “Obama Health Care”. I could list more. I think of the Supreme Court and federal judges.

    From my short time as a Lutheran, I, along with Steve @ 2, find this to be a working example of the two kingdoms doctrine, left and right, Caesar and God. We are electing a national leader not a pope i.e. religious leader.

    I am not in agreement with either candidate in every way, but a change of administration is necessary and maybe just as important as the “figurehead”. I have always thought Obama has a good chance of re-election but like several of you, hope that I am wrong.

  • Helen K.

    We have already voted for Romney. We don’t think he is a perfect candidate but he is the opposition to what we currently have, an endorser of more federal government involvement in nearly every area of our society. Then there are the issues of abortion, same-sex marriage and last but not least the “Obama Health Care”. I could list more. I think of the Supreme Court and federal judges.

    From my short time as a Lutheran, I, along with Steve @ 2, find this to be a working example of the two kingdoms doctrine, left and right, Caesar and God. We are electing a national leader not a pope i.e. religious leader.

    I am not in agreement with either candidate in every way, but a change of administration is necessary and maybe just as important as the “figurehead”. I have always thought Obama has a good chance of re-election but like several of you, hope that I am wrong.

  • Tom,
    I believe he’ll say what ever it takes to get elected.

  • Tom,
    I believe he’ll say what ever it takes to get elected.

  • I almost want Romney to win, because I want to see how many months it is before he gets thrown under the bus by all his biggest fans this side of the election. Of course, with Bush II, it took almost six years, so I’m probably too optimistic. But then again, I don’t think Romney would be nearly as principled as Bush II was.

  • I almost want Romney to win, because I want to see how many months it is before he gets thrown under the bus by all his biggest fans this side of the election. Of course, with Bush II, it took almost six years, so I’m probably too optimistic. But then again, I don’t think Romney would be nearly as principled as Bush II was.

  • LAJ

    Even though Romney is not an ideal candidate, this country will be much worse for Christians if Obama wins again. He thinks religion is only 1 hour a week if that, and there’s no such thing as a conscience or if there is, it doesn’t matter.

  • LAJ

    Even though Romney is not an ideal candidate, this country will be much worse for Christians if Obama wins again. He thinks religion is only 1 hour a week if that, and there’s no such thing as a conscience or if there is, it doesn’t matter.

  • LAJ

    @41 I believe Romney when he said he looked into the abortion question, and decided after solid consideration that it is wrong. Can’t we put the best construction on this until he proves otherwise? At least he is not as pro-abortion as his opponent.

  • LAJ

    @41 I believe Romney when he said he looked into the abortion question, and decided after solid consideration that it is wrong. Can’t we put the best construction on this until he proves otherwise? At least he is not as pro-abortion as his opponent.

  • Andrew

    I really don’t know why christians would vote democrat while abortion and other things that are antithetical to christian values are trumpeted as their key “virtues”. If you’d prefer to vote for cheaper pills and doctors visits for yourself while an absolute holocaust of the unborn takes place (and is celebrated as a perverse virtue) you’re more than welcome.

    From memory, first century christians were known as those who adopted abandoned children, and who fought against infanticide in roman culture. all people were seen to have been made in the image of God. And here we are again, ~2000 years later and it is christians who by and large are fighting for the protection of helpless children.

    then again. as i come from australia where apparently our collective health system makes us all socialists, and our gun laws apparently make us vulnerable to the government, we’re probably considered a lost cause already. 🙂

  • Andrew

    I really don’t know why christians would vote democrat while abortion and other things that are antithetical to christian values are trumpeted as their key “virtues”. If you’d prefer to vote for cheaper pills and doctors visits for yourself while an absolute holocaust of the unborn takes place (and is celebrated as a perverse virtue) you’re more than welcome.

    From memory, first century christians were known as those who adopted abandoned children, and who fought against infanticide in roman culture. all people were seen to have been made in the image of God. And here we are again, ~2000 years later and it is christians who by and large are fighting for the protection of helpless children.

    then again. as i come from australia where apparently our collective health system makes us all socialists, and our gun laws apparently make us vulnerable to the government, we’re probably considered a lost cause already. 🙂

  • LAJ, do you want us to put the best construction on what candidates say (@44), or do you want us to believe the worst about Obama and how he doesn’t believe in conscience (@43)?

    Those two approaches just might be in tension, you know.

  • LAJ, do you want us to put the best construction on what candidates say (@44), or do you want us to believe the worst about Obama and how he doesn’t believe in conscience (@43)?

    Those two approaches just might be in tension, you know.

  • Andrew (@45), well, here in America — apparently unlike in Oz — we have candidates and parties that stake positions on a wide variety of issues, such that some Christians find themselves voting for a candidate that they don’t agree with 100%. Again, I understand that things are not this way where you live. But, given all that, people in America are required to think about which issues are most important to them, including a fairly complex calculus (in some cases) about how likely an issue is actually going to come up in legislation or regulations, how likely a given candidate is to actually take action according to his campaign promises, and so on.

    You’re lucky that you live in a country where the candidates you vote for perfectly mirror your thoughts and beliefs.

  • Andrew (@45), well, here in America — apparently unlike in Oz — we have candidates and parties that stake positions on a wide variety of issues, such that some Christians find themselves voting for a candidate that they don’t agree with 100%. Again, I understand that things are not this way where you live. But, given all that, people in America are required to think about which issues are most important to them, including a fairly complex calculus (in some cases) about how likely an issue is actually going to come up in legislation or regulations, how likely a given candidate is to actually take action according to his campaign promises, and so on.

    You’re lucky that you live in a country where the candidates you vote for perfectly mirror your thoughts and beliefs.

  • Tom Hering

    Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center just presented an interesting fact on the PBS NewsHour. More Obama voters are voting for Obama than Romney voters are for Romney, i.e., a larger percentage of Romney voters are actually voting against Obama. But the candidate with more positive support usually wins.

  • Tom Hering

    Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Center just presented an interesting fact on the PBS NewsHour. More Obama voters are voting for Obama than Romney voters are for Romney, i.e., a larger percentage of Romney voters are actually voting against Obama. But the candidate with more positive support usually wins.

  • Andrew

    tODD: no explanation as to why voting for a party that considers gay marriage and abortion to be virtues are consistent with your stand as a christian.

    australia doesn’t have the market cornered in perfect candidates (where exactly did i claim that?), but would does appear that americans have the monopoly on smug superiority. Enjoy your hegemony while it lasts.

  • Andrew

    tODD: no explanation as to why voting for a party that considers gay marriage and abortion to be virtues are consistent with your stand as a christian.

    australia doesn’t have the market cornered in perfect candidates (where exactly did i claim that?), but would does appear that americans have the monopoly on smug superiority. Enjoy your hegemony while it lasts.

  • Andrew (@49), if, as I am now saddened to learn, Australia “doesn’t have the market cornered in perfect candidates”, then maybe you already know what it’s like to vote for a candidate whose stances do not 100% reflect your own beliefs. And, if so, then do I really have to explain it to you?

    but would does appear that americans have the monopoly on smug superiority.

    Please. You mad, bro? Have you read your posts here? Smug superiority is often the number one export that many first-world nations offer to America.

  • Andrew (@49), if, as I am now saddened to learn, Australia “doesn’t have the market cornered in perfect candidates”, then maybe you already know what it’s like to vote for a candidate whose stances do not 100% reflect your own beliefs. And, if so, then do I really have to explain it to you?

    but would does appear that americans have the monopoly on smug superiority.

    Please. You mad, bro? Have you read your posts here? Smug superiority is often the number one export that many first-world nations offer to America.

  • Andrew

    and yet you’d still prefer to vote for a president who would give you cheaper healthcare at the cost of no prospect of slowing down the abortion holocaust?

    as we all have to vote for imperfect candidates, each is a lesser of several evils. it’s just a pity that the evil of murder gets trumped by other considerations.

    looking at my comments and yours, (mine especially) its a case study in how if we were having this discussion over a beer or a coffee we’d probably be far more civil and polite than sitting behind our respective keyboards.

  • Andrew

    and yet you’d still prefer to vote for a president who would give you cheaper healthcare at the cost of no prospect of slowing down the abortion holocaust?

    as we all have to vote for imperfect candidates, each is a lesser of several evils. it’s just a pity that the evil of murder gets trumped by other considerations.

    looking at my comments and yours, (mine especially) its a case study in how if we were having this discussion over a beer or a coffee we’d probably be far more civil and polite than sitting behind our respective keyboards.

  • helen

    If the government would step aside and let people shop with their own dollars for their health care provision and insurance options, free market competition would bring down the cost of health care

    S’cuse me. I grew up under that system. My father died at 36 of a misdiagnosis, a “surgical error”, followed by the Doctor’s reluctance to expose his incompetence, to those who might have helped, at Rochester, MN, only 50 miles away.
    My mother died after cardiac arrest at 52, partly because there was no equipment for resuscitation on the same floor of the hospital and it took them 15 minutes to get started, according to the cardiologist called long after the fact.
    That is the “cost of free market health care.” Unless you are rich enough not to need insurance….

    [These days anyone with more than a bad cold in that county goes to Rochester, I’m told.]

  • helen

    If the government would step aside and let people shop with their own dollars for their health care provision and insurance options, free market competition would bring down the cost of health care

    S’cuse me. I grew up under that system. My father died at 36 of a misdiagnosis, a “surgical error”, followed by the Doctor’s reluctance to expose his incompetence, to those who might have helped, at Rochester, MN, only 50 miles away.
    My mother died after cardiac arrest at 52, partly because there was no equipment for resuscitation on the same floor of the hospital and it took them 15 minutes to get started, according to the cardiologist called long after the fact.
    That is the “cost of free market health care.” Unless you are rich enough not to need insurance….

    [These days anyone with more than a bad cold in that county goes to Rochester, I’m told.]

  • helen

    Even though Romney is not an ideal candidate, this country will be much worse for Christians if Obama wins again.

    Maybe not. Christianity, if not all Christians, survived Nero, Caligula and a host of others who tried to destroy it. [And, unfortunately, I don’t think one more child will be saved from abortion under Romney.] More of those who are living may grow up malnourished with poor health care, because it’s of vital importance to give gadzillionaires a 20% tax cut on top of the lowest tax rate they’ve had in 50 years already. (And what they’ve actually paid is even more obscene.)

  • helen

    Even though Romney is not an ideal candidate, this country will be much worse for Christians if Obama wins again.

    Maybe not. Christianity, if not all Christians, survived Nero, Caligula and a host of others who tried to destroy it. [And, unfortunately, I don’t think one more child will be saved from abortion under Romney.] More of those who are living may grow up malnourished with poor health care, because it’s of vital importance to give gadzillionaires a 20% tax cut on top of the lowest tax rate they’ve had in 50 years already. (And what they’ve actually paid is even more obscene.)

  • Andrew (@51), a discussion over a beverage would be preferred, yes.

    But you persist in assuming that I voted for Obama, and that I did so because of health care. Which is really annoying of you, because it tells me that you’re making all sorts of baseless assumptions here. Not really the best way to learn what someone is thinking, I’d argue.

    it’s just a pity that the evil of murder gets trumped by other considerations.

    Sigh. It’s like you’re not listening at all. Allow me to spell it out for you, then.

    First of all, the President hardly has direct control over abortion. By most people’s arguments, the most he can do is nominate Supreme Court justices as positions open up, and hope that, in time, there will be enough of them, and a relevant case to try, such that Roe v. Wade will be overturned. But that will not end the “evil of murder” you referred to. Not at all. It will simply remand it to the states. At which point we’ll have some states where abortion continues as-is, and others where it doesn’t. As you can see, that is already a fairly torturous path from President to fewer, but not no, abortions.

    Complicating that is the fact that Romney does not appear to be a terribly consistent pro-life advocate. Oh, he says the right things now, but when he last held office, he was notably pro-choice. Which Romney to believe? After all, if you vote for the guy and he doesn’t actually do much that’s effectively pro-life (it’s happened a time or two before with Republicans), then who cares what his rhetoric was? To wit: the odds that a Romney presidency and a second Obama term would be vastly different as to abortion laws isn’t super clear. Again, not for lack of pro-life rhetoric from Romney. But because the man has been consistently inconsistent.

    On top of all that, while Republicans only ever seem to think that “the evil of murder” only ever applies to the topic of abortion, it actually applies more readily to a nation’s foreign policy. Especially when that nation’s foreign policy involves murdering — yes, murdering — its own citizens abroad. And inflicting civilian casualties/deaths with what can at best be called extreme indifference. Point being: people die. And while the deaths from such foreign adventures are not as many as those in abortion, it’s worth noting that deaths caused by drones and armies are those intentionally caused by our government and its Commander-in-Chief. Whereas abortions would only be allowed by law, but not actually brought about by the government — they would be the actions of private citizens.

    All of which does tend to muddy the waters quite a bit more than you’re apparently willing to admit. I don’t begrudge a fellow Christian for wading through all that and arriving at a different conclusion than I, but I do expect them to at least acknowledge the complexity of the issue.

  • Andrew (@51), a discussion over a beverage would be preferred, yes.

    But you persist in assuming that I voted for Obama, and that I did so because of health care. Which is really annoying of you, because it tells me that you’re making all sorts of baseless assumptions here. Not really the best way to learn what someone is thinking, I’d argue.

    it’s just a pity that the evil of murder gets trumped by other considerations.

    Sigh. It’s like you’re not listening at all. Allow me to spell it out for you, then.

    First of all, the President hardly has direct control over abortion. By most people’s arguments, the most he can do is nominate Supreme Court justices as positions open up, and hope that, in time, there will be enough of them, and a relevant case to try, such that Roe v. Wade will be overturned. But that will not end the “evil of murder” you referred to. Not at all. It will simply remand it to the states. At which point we’ll have some states where abortion continues as-is, and others where it doesn’t. As you can see, that is already a fairly torturous path from President to fewer, but not no, abortions.

    Complicating that is the fact that Romney does not appear to be a terribly consistent pro-life advocate. Oh, he says the right things now, but when he last held office, he was notably pro-choice. Which Romney to believe? After all, if you vote for the guy and he doesn’t actually do much that’s effectively pro-life (it’s happened a time or two before with Republicans), then who cares what his rhetoric was? To wit: the odds that a Romney presidency and a second Obama term would be vastly different as to abortion laws isn’t super clear. Again, not for lack of pro-life rhetoric from Romney. But because the man has been consistently inconsistent.

    On top of all that, while Republicans only ever seem to think that “the evil of murder” only ever applies to the topic of abortion, it actually applies more readily to a nation’s foreign policy. Especially when that nation’s foreign policy involves murdering — yes, murdering — its own citizens abroad. And inflicting civilian casualties/deaths with what can at best be called extreme indifference. Point being: people die. And while the deaths from such foreign adventures are not as many as those in abortion, it’s worth noting that deaths caused by drones and armies are those intentionally caused by our government and its Commander-in-Chief. Whereas abortions would only be allowed by law, but not actually brought about by the government — they would be the actions of private citizens.

    All of which does tend to muddy the waters quite a bit more than you’re apparently willing to admit. I don’t begrudge a fellow Christian for wading through all that and arriving at a different conclusion than I, but I do expect them to at least acknowledge the complexity of the issue.

  • Stone the Crows

    I’m voting Romney/Ryan. It came down to a choice between a Marxist and a Mormon. I would also much prefer to have Paul Ryan a heartbeat away from the Presidency than slow Joe Biden. Rolling back Obamacare is a big concern for me. After a trip or two to the biggest VA hospital in the state I decided I didn’t want that for myself my family or anyone else; i.e. a system top heavy with beaurocrats. The only thing I got cured of at the VA was a nostalgia for the ’70’s and I also got a sharp reminder of the malaise era of President Carter et al-nope don’t want to go back to that. I would also like to see the military shored up with more recruitment, President Obama cut back the numbers of troops but increased deployments, our men and women are goiing through two or three deployments and it is causing them great emotional and physical harm. If we’re going to fight a war on five fronts then we should have the force numbers to do so.
    I’ll be voting for Deb Fisher for Senate, I’ve had enough of so called moderate Democrats who talk a conservative line at home and vote the party line inside the beltway.
    That being said, whoever is elected, I will pray that God grants them wisdom to do so.

  • Stone the Crows

    I’m voting Romney/Ryan. It came down to a choice between a Marxist and a Mormon. I would also much prefer to have Paul Ryan a heartbeat away from the Presidency than slow Joe Biden. Rolling back Obamacare is a big concern for me. After a trip or two to the biggest VA hospital in the state I decided I didn’t want that for myself my family or anyone else; i.e. a system top heavy with beaurocrats. The only thing I got cured of at the VA was a nostalgia for the ’70’s and I also got a sharp reminder of the malaise era of President Carter et al-nope don’t want to go back to that. I would also like to see the military shored up with more recruitment, President Obama cut back the numbers of troops but increased deployments, our men and women are goiing through two or three deployments and it is causing them great emotional and physical harm. If we’re going to fight a war on five fronts then we should have the force numbers to do so.
    I’ll be voting for Deb Fisher for Senate, I’ve had enough of so called moderate Democrats who talk a conservative line at home and vote the party line inside the beltway.
    That being said, whoever is elected, I will pray that God grants them wisdom to do so.

  • JunkerGeorg

    Stone the Crows @ post #55,

    “I would also much prefer to have Paul Ryan a heartbeat away from the Presidency than slow Joe Biden.”
    —–

    Casting aside the ‘substance’ of a man in terms of his knowledge/intelligence/political principles/understanding of the issues, if Republicans were stating their preference of Republican V.P. simply on the grounds of their future electability for POTUS in 2016 or 2020, then I think that given that the personal “likeability” factor or “style” of a candidate is such a major factor amongst superficial voters (in terms of charisma, charm, communication, identifiability with the Middle Class, etc.), either Christie from NJ or Marco Rubio from Florida would have made more sense than Ryan. Ryan certainly has “substance” (or at least has been given the ‘appearance’ of having substance), but does he have enough “style” to appeal to the superficial voter? I’m not so sure he has as much as guys like Christie or Rubio. If a man’s “substance” were enough to get him elected, then while some may have their Ryan, others like myself have our Rand Paul. But alas, similar to Ryan, Rand Paul also is lacking in personal charisma, being too monotone and wooden in his speaking. Again, this is just my subjective opinion, and might be no less superficial. 😉 Still….would that there would be another Reagan, the great communicator who had such a wealth of both style and substance that even conservative democrats could not help but listen to him and admire him (i.e., at least the more economically-libertarian Reagan of 80-84 before he went all big government in his 2nd term.) But I guess guys like Reagan only come once in a lifetime, if that.

  • JunkerGeorg

    Stone the Crows @ post #55,

    “I would also much prefer to have Paul Ryan a heartbeat away from the Presidency than slow Joe Biden.”
    —–

    Casting aside the ‘substance’ of a man in terms of his knowledge/intelligence/political principles/understanding of the issues, if Republicans were stating their preference of Republican V.P. simply on the grounds of their future electability for POTUS in 2016 or 2020, then I think that given that the personal “likeability” factor or “style” of a candidate is such a major factor amongst superficial voters (in terms of charisma, charm, communication, identifiability with the Middle Class, etc.), either Christie from NJ or Marco Rubio from Florida would have made more sense than Ryan. Ryan certainly has “substance” (or at least has been given the ‘appearance’ of having substance), but does he have enough “style” to appeal to the superficial voter? I’m not so sure he has as much as guys like Christie or Rubio. If a man’s “substance” were enough to get him elected, then while some may have their Ryan, others like myself have our Rand Paul. But alas, similar to Ryan, Rand Paul also is lacking in personal charisma, being too monotone and wooden in his speaking. Again, this is just my subjective opinion, and might be no less superficial. 😉 Still….would that there would be another Reagan, the great communicator who had such a wealth of both style and substance that even conservative democrats could not help but listen to him and admire him (i.e., at least the more economically-libertarian Reagan of 80-84 before he went all big government in his 2nd term.) But I guess guys like Reagan only come once in a lifetime, if that.

  • mikeb

    I took my 7-year-old daughter to vote with me today and she helped fill in the oval next to Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. She’s been excited about Romney for about two weeks now as we’ve used the election to talk about government and democracy. They gave her one of those “I voted” stickers which really made her day.

  • mikeb

    I took my 7-year-old daughter to vote with me today and she helped fill in the oval next to Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. She’s been excited about Romney for about two weeks now as we’ve used the election to talk about government and democracy. They gave her one of those “I voted” stickers which really made her day.