Romney

[YOhio]

This language is detrimental to the public discourse and is only an attempt to inflame and denigrate your opposition. There is nothing of value or substance here. If you really want to convince others who are on the fence or who support Obama that he was the wrong choice for the country, it would serve you to not use such divisive language.

Go and delete your 'swollen p***y' post and then maybe you can have a little credibility with these little lectures.

[YOhio]

Wow, I hope your re trolling because if. It this is a low point for you.

Have you ever read any of Il Pad's work? No way is that a low point for him.

[CardiacCoug]

How "successful" a US President is considered is all about the economy and the economy is bound to get better so the next president is going to be OK.

Reagan and Clinton are the "best" presidents of the last 30 years because they presided during good economic times. I think if Obama wins a second term he will salvage his legacy as the economy turns around and if a Republican wins, he will probably become a successful two-term president.

Of course the government can only hurt the economy. Ron Paul is right when he says that it's not the government's job, nor does the government have the ability to truly create jobs -- but even the other Republicans obviously don't accept that politically unpopular premise.

[il Padrino Ute]

Wow, I hope your re trolling because if. It this is a low point for you.

Why should I not state my honest opinion?

[Donuthole]

Why should I not state my honest opinion?

Stating your opinion is fine. Stating your opinion as if it were fact is what rubs people the wrong way. Still, as your post history evidences, there is nothing stopping you from doing just that.

[il Padrino Ute]

Stating your opinion is fine. Stating your opinion as if it were fact is what rubs people the wrong way. Still, as your post history evidences, there is nothing stopping you from doing just that.

I'll admit that I feel strongly enough in my opinions that I state them as fact, but I won't nor should apologize for it. I am who I am and I never leave a doubt where I stand. I think the world would be better if we would all say exactly what we mean without worrying about how others may receive it.

[YOhio]

I'll admit that I feel strongly enough in my opinions that I state them as fact, but I won't nor should apologize for it. I am who I am and I never leave a doubt where I stand. I think the world would be better if we would all say exactly what we mean without worrying about how others may receive it.

[RobinFinderson]

Mormons have a pretty good reputation right now for being good business people, smart, high achievers generally as a group. Producing a president out of a group that is such a minority is quite an achievement in itself. Producing a bad president is not going to change that much.

This, of course, would depend on 1). How bad a president, and 2). the extent to which that badness seems to be a reflection of a Mormon mindset.

Overall, I think that a Romney presidency is more likely to present the Mormon church in a good light. The biggest challenges the president will face will probably be tied to the economy and national security. Failure in either area is unlikely to reflect on Mormonism. Social issues is the area where things could get dicey-- welfare, abortion, gay rights, the war on drugs. These issues have a way of mattering more than they probably should, but if Romney is perceived as a roadblock to gay rights (for example), people will connect that to Mormonism.

[RobinFinderson]

I'll admit that I feel strongly enough in my opinions that I state them as fact, but I won't nor should apologize for it. I am who I am and I never leave a doubt where I stand. I think the world would be better if we would all say exactly what we mean without worrying about how others may receive it.

Yeah! Your arbitrary and unilateral ban on my replying to you or in threads you start is over! Thank you il Pad. I'm sure this will serve as the start of a great friendship.

[jay santos]

This, of course, would depend on 1). How bad a president, and 2). the extent to which that badness seems to be a reflection of a Mormon mindset.

Overall, I think that a Romney presidency is more likely to present the Mormon church in a good light. The biggest challenges the president will face will probably be tied to the economy and national security. Failure in either area is unlikely to reflect on Mormonism. Social issues is the area where things could get dicey-- welfare, abortion, gay rights, the war on drugs. These issues have a way of mattering more than they probably should, but if Romney is perceived as a roadblock to gay rights (for example), people will connect that to Mormonism.

So if Romney pisses the gays off, it could really backfire on Mormons? Got it. Sure hope that doesn't happen.

[il Padrino Ute]

If I'm wrong about thinking that the world would be better if we were open about our opinions, tell me why.

[RobinFinderson]

So if Romney pisses the gays off, it could really backfire on Mormons? Got it. Sure hope that doesn't happen.

Black people are a minority in our country as well, yet their struggle for civil rights comprises a significant part of our national identity. People who think that gay civil rights is a small thing, or something that only matters to 'the gays,' really don't have a clear concept of how history tends to look at these issues.

[woot]

While I maintain that the election process weeds out most anyone who would actually make a good president, I'm starting to think that the political environment and general state of the nation is such that even when a potentially great president gets into office he or she is likely to end up mostly failing.

Too many of our policies and programs need ground-up revamping, but such any such project would require a great deal of collaboration from folks of both parties, and it seems that everyone in both houses are blinded by partisan hatred, to the point that nobody even tries to work in good faith toward common goals anymore.

But I also think Cardiac has a point in saying that presidents are mostly judged by how the economy does on their watch, over which the president has questionable influence, and perhaps whatever influence they have isn't likely to show up until they're out of office.

Meanwhile, I'm hoping Romney get the nomination. I doubt I'd vote for him, but I'd consider it, assuming he avoids the overt pandering to the crazies that ruined him in 2008 and he moves to the center for the general election.

[jay santos]

Black people are a minority in our country as well, yet their struggle for civil rights comprises a significant part of our national identity. People who think that gay civil rights is a small thing, or something that only matters to 'the gays,' really don't have a clear concept of how history tends to look at these issues.

If you couldn't tell, I was being sarcastic, as there is not much of a relationship between the Mormons and the gays for Romney to sever. I think you're barking up the wrong tree on this one. Romney's not going to stick his neck out on civil rights. Maybe he goes down as an ineffective president, but there's much downside for Mormonism as Romney as a representative.

[woot]

If I'm wrong about thinking that the world would be better if we were open about our opinions, tell me why.

As so many CUFers have told me, it's not about what you say, but how you say it. Of course you can be honest. However, I think we all would hope that your "honest opinion" includes something a bit more substantive than "I hate that guy because he sucks!"