What would it take for you to vote for the other guy?

1) I would have to have a vote first. But it looks as if my petition to become a citizen will still be pending in November.

2) Supposing that I had a vote, I would vote for Jill Stein.

3) In order for me to vote for Obama, I would have to live in a swing state. (New Jersey will almost certainly go Democratic.) In order for me to vote for him on his own merits, his policies would have to be more ambitious in reach, and his pursuit of them more aggressive. Obama is trying too hard to appease Republicans who cannot be appeased.

4) In order for me to consider Romney, he'd have to stand by his policies as Massachusett's governor. He'd have to campaign for them rather than disowning them. (I'm talking, of course, about universal healthcare, respect for reproductive rights, and so forth.) And, more crucially, his party would have to be able to support such a candidate. This is not as crazy as it sounds: From Lincoln to Teddy Roosevelt to Eisenhower and even to Nixon, America has had several liberal Republican presidents. But given the current state of the Republican party, it won't happen again anytime soon.

Thanks Thomas. I had to review the latest on Jill Stein.

Thanks for an interesting thread. It was a good question.

Republicans used to be the steady thinkers and the Progressives; it was the Democrats who were split up into Unionists, States' Rights Rangers and Grangers, racist Dixiecrats and WarHawks.

We're still splintered out in the Middle West where the last of the Free Range Farmers greatgrandsons are the Senators and Congressmen.
Thank God, the Dixiecrats left in a huff over LBJ's insistence that we be a Nation of Equals. Good riddance.

Republicans have been sold a bill of goods in the past ten years, the effect of up/down yes/no thinking which was certainly NOT the style of William F. Buckley. (Do you think Bill Buckley would ask anyone to sign onto Grover Norquist's No Tax Pledge? heh.)

~~
In order for me to vote for Romney, he would have to publicly rebuke the anti-tax, anti-women, pro-voter suppression, anti-union public service elements of his party AND promise to have everybody out of Afghanistan by Christmas.

Joe(Unless we could do it by Thanksgiving)Nation

Its like playing with a snake and not expecting to get bit.

Yes, vote for the real Chicagoan!

I really have no firm commitment to either candidate both have aspects of their platform that are consistent with my beliefs so I meander around sites further dedicating myself on the issues. Most of the time just get frustrated at the amount of discussion that stems from distracted issues. Really President Obama got elected initially on hope an change. No specifics were really laid out By either candidate ... Hope and change or more of the same were our choices. America chose hope and change.Flash forward lots onfolks have discovered they don t like the changes so we end up with a lame suck do nothing but point fingers and assign blame. So now we are here the issues on the table are being addresses through idiology. But I have not found one plan outlined lots of philosophical bull both statistics and studies to prove each sides point. I want to see a plan then I want to hear from the botto
And middle levels if they agree or disagree with the plan. Cause as far as I can tell the office should be vacant. The bottom and middle levels are broken and need to be repaired first. Tell me the plan if it makes sense and has the support of the underlings then you will have my confident vote and support. A vote for an ideology is a vote for continued stagnation in Washington.

If you think any Dixiecrats are gone you need a tour down South. They call themselves Republicans now.

McG has a habit of contradicting himself when you give him enough rope.

That he can rationalize the lying of Romney only shows his own character.

Is that worth a "DUH?"

Good post; Obama's ability to become the real leader of this country is missing.

He still hasn't learned that the GOP is out to make him a one term president.

Lame.

To get me to vote for Romney would take red-hot tongs, but my pen-pal in Russia, who's a real Communist, dislikes Obama the most.

I find it interesting he dislikes Obama more than Romney. He says Romney, openly, represents monied interests, but Obama does it secretly and has the people convinced he's for the "little man".

You mean Ive been taking political advice from a ferner!

I can’t think of anything that would get me to vote Romney.

Obama is my choice

Seriously, it would take another 9/11, and I say this as respects what might convert Barack Obama from his current leftist world view, because the only way I would ever vote for him would be if he became a conservative.

This , of course, isn't going to happen...even with another 9/11, and quite frankly, changing his world view isn't even remotely worth another devasting event like 9/11.

The only possible way I might vote for him would require an utterly fantastic scenario wherein his opponent was a terrifying force of evil. (Couldn't be the Anti-Christ since, as we all know, Obama holds that distinction.)

Nope...never, ever will happen.

Having said this, I seriously doubt that my friends on the Left view Mitt Romney with the same viceral fear and loathing, as my Right-Wing confreres and I view Obama.

This is why Romney will win in November.

The "Hope & Change" surge of 2008 is gone and couldn't be recaptured even if Obama wasn't such a dismal failure as president. It was irrational and could only be vindicated by someone who had the power to actually stop the rise of the seas.

Obama rode passion to victory in 2008 and that passion will not be available to him in 2012.

Nonetheless, passion will decide the election, but it will be the passion of voters who strongly object to Obama's attempts to transform America and strongly fear what he is capable of in a second term; unrestrained by the desire to be re-elected.

Woe be unto America if Obama obtains the flexibility he, indirectly, promised Putin.

Finn, Bin Laden is dead, because Obama made the effort. Obama increased the war in Afghanistan by 50,000 troops.

Obama increased funding for the Defense Department during his tenure.

You silly jerk!

Why are people voting vishal 1234 down?

I don't mind his or her post..

I have a problem with Romney, to the extent I've followed him, as not actually wishwashy, but changing the laundry (and that is not a dig about mormon mores, cute but not my point). I get how changes can happen with anyone interested in questions of state and with the exigencies of politics, while intensively trying to learn in a fraught atmosphere. I don't burn with fervor anti Romney.

I do know two politicians who stuck to what they thought was right, one starting out as Republican. I know them personally, but not their every thought, especially now as years go by since we've talked/I moved.

As many have said, it would take a turn around, and I've no thoughts Romney would do that. He might be tempted to, though.

Can't you read? I already said Johnson interested me.

I know things I like about him, but not enough about things I wouldn't like.

leftist?

CI (you silly doody head), so what?

It may come as a shock to you, but I didn't do a dance when Bin Laden was killed, and I would not have danced if Bush got him either.

I'm glad the bastard died violently (and I hope he experienced extreme fear and pain) and it was an important symbolic victory, but while I give credit to Obama for making it happen (notwithstanding his unseemly personal grab of the glory) , it didn't materially affect the threat Islamism poses to America.

As for Afghanistan, he, haltingly, approved a surge only to declare defeat through a scheduled pull-out.

Barack will never be known as Obama of Afghanistan.

I don't know that he increased spending on defense during his presidency but if he did, I will bet dollars to donuts that it was a result of the gimmicks of Washington accounting and not because he was of the position that it was necessary.

Having said all of this, I again say "So what?"

Even if I adopt your sycophantic view concerning these issues, why would they cause me to vote for him?

President McCain would have accomplished at least the same and almost definitely more.

Obama is gutting our economy and our nation.

I'm glad that his narcissism has led to his personally pronouncing death sentences on certain of our enemies, but this is not something that will attract my vote.

You're reply to my post indicates a poor (and I would suggest deliberately so) understanding of conservative thinking. We're not all about bloody revenge and big ass weaponry.

Now, you must consider whether or not what you replied is the gist of your argument for persuading non-believers to vote for The One.

This is really all you can muster in defense of him?

Notably, your defense hasn't a single element of domestic policy.

How far down the path of failure will you partisan stalwarts follow?

What?