Quantcast

Not voting for Romney causing Obama to win.

Adam 2012/05/07 15:13:32
If those voting for Romney start blame me for Obama winning because I refused to vote for him. I am going to start blaming them for choosing a candidate I could not vote for. So munch on that for a while.
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • Robb 2012/05/22 20:12:41
    Robb
    +3
    Hold me nose and vote for the lesser of two evils? Who is the lesser? Tens of thousands of us will sit out the November election because we have had pushed upon us a rich, old hand-picked,arrogant man who has worked for the last SIX years to buy the Presidency. No, no, never!!!

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Lee 2012/06/04 01:24:56
    Lee
    Everyone should vote for Romney.

    After all, Mitt Romney wears magic underwear.

    http://www.sodahead.com/unite...

    Obama, on the other hand, refuses to wear magic underwear.

    Obviously Mitt is a far better choice for President.
  • Robb 2012/05/22 20:12:41
    Robb
    +3
    Hold me nose and vote for the lesser of two evils? Who is the lesser? Tens of thousands of us will sit out the November election because we have had pushed upon us a rich, old hand-picked,arrogant man who has worked for the last SIX years to buy the Presidency. No, no, never!!!
  • Revolution 2012 2012/05/22 01:40:57
    Revolution 2012
    You should not EVER vote for someone you do not want, just to vote another person out of office. It defeats the purpose of voting: To elect someone who represents your will and your country, on your behalf. If you want to stop Obama and dislike Romney, don't vote at all, or vote Ron Paul. The media is conditioning you to fall into that pathetic "Anyone but Obama" rhetoric. It's disgraceful and an attack against the democratic process.
  • John Galt jr or Ron/jon 2012/05/11 23:45:34
  • Shayes ™ 2012/05/10 20:27:42
    Shayes ™
    You do know that a no vote for Romney is a yes vote for Obama, right? Perhaps consider the lesser of the two evils, if you can reconcile the issues. Look at it this way, who is more likely to destroy this country at the speed of sound? Now vote for the opposite. :)
  • Adam Shayes ™ 2012/05/12 02:08:45
    Adam
    A quick destruction will open the eyes of many. A slow destruction will blind most to their own destruction.
  • Shayes ™ Adam 2012/05/14 20:56:45
    Shayes ™
    Right now we're in a slow destruction mode but quickly a lot of us have opened our eyes, prayerfully in time enough to pump the brakes and turn this train around before it falls over the cliff.
  • Moneyman 2012/05/08 21:30:03
    Moneyman
    +1
    If a candidate cannot convince enough people to vote for him then that is the fault of the candidate not the people that were not convinced to hire him.

    Conservatives say they want Obama to stop blaming everyone else. In this case, if Romney does not convince enough people that they should vote for him they should be just as consistent as when they, conservatives, claim they want Obama to take responsibility. Otherwise, they are no better and are just blowing smoke when they complain about Obama blaming others.

    Romney has the duty to convince people he is the right person for the job. It is not the voters duty to hire him just because he is "not Obama".

    I have already decided that Obama should be fired in November. Now, I am looking at all the people, besides Obama, that are applying for the position and I will vote for the person that I think will do the best job, regardless of any party affiliation. If Romney, like any other candidate, wants my vote, he has to convince me that he is the best person for the job. Otherwise I will be picking someone else.

    If a person fails to get a job offer because they blew a job interview or there were better applicants, would these same conservatives think that the manager or the owner of the company should be blamed for not hiring that person?
  • betz 2012/05/07 16:57:31
    betz
    I wouldn't blame you for Obama winning, if in fact he does. I WILL blame you for not caring enough for your nation to even cast a vote. I hope you do vote.
    Munch on that for a while.
  • fluer 2012/05/07 16:00:26
    fluer
    +1
    Look I do not like Romney at all but I despise Obama. So if it takes voting for Romney to get Obama out then I will vote for Romney. One we are not sure about and the other if a proven failure. Great choice, but then when in the last 40 years or so have we had a truly great choice?
  • Adam fluer 2012/05/07 16:04:10
    Adam
    +1
    The reason we aren't getting great choices is because we are willing to tip our hat and vote for the choices we are given.
  • fluer Adam 2012/05/07 18:38:05
    fluer
    +1
    I have voted in every primary since I was old enough to vote and I can honestly say the reason we do not have great choices is because the best people do not run. The game is nasty, there are no morals or ethics, they put your life under a microscope unless of course you are Obama, and generally you have no life outside of the race and the job if you win. Good men just chose not to put themselves and their families through such a massive wringer. So the gunk that is left is what filters down to our choices. Then our choice is to not vote which gives up on any choice or to chose which one of the jerks is the least harm to the country. Like I said some choice.
  • Adam fluer 2012/05/07 19:41:20 (edited)
    Adam
    +1
    There are times in which good people run, but they are often denigrated and marginalized. The media even puts a spin on them to make them look crazy. Michelle Bachmann for instance was a great candidate. But if you look at what the people who have been voting for Mitt Romney in the primaries say about why they voted for them you will find that their reason was because they thought he could win. Not based on his ideals.
  • fluer Adam 2012/05/07 21:46:42
    fluer
    This is true too, but in a majority wins environment that is how it works...sad!!!
  • Moneyman fluer 2012/05/08 21:41:30
    Moneyman
    One of the problems with our current system is that a few smaller states get to have their voices heard and some candidates are forced out of the process before the rest of the country even gets to have their say.

    The true "majority" of the entire country is not represented in most of the primary process because most of us only get to pick from the leftovers that the few small states say we should be able to consider.
  • fluer Moneyman 2012/05/09 12:10:46
    fluer
    Oh I agree with you absolutely it is not about who is best it is about who can win. If it had truly been about who is best Obama surely would not be in the White House now. But unfortunately for us we have to work within the system and that is the reality of our political system so we end up holding our nose to vote.
  • Moneyman fluer 2012/05/10 17:17:33
    Moneyman
    For the most part, that is how it has been for years. I think that over the next decade or so we will see an increase in minor party activity and involvement that, hopefully, will see at least one other political party having more of a presence and affect on the national level. Some of the other minor party's have had success on local and state levels.

    The only part that I would probably disagree with you on is that, imo, a person should actually cast their vote for the person that they think would be the best person for the job, regardless of the party. In other words I don't believe in straight party line voting or even limiting my votes to just the two major political party's candidates.
  • fluer Moneyman 2012/05/10 19:24:28
    fluer
    +1
    I would normally agree with you unless one of them is the incumbent and as pathetic as the one we have when we need to get him out of there. Especially when the country is teetering on the edge of bankrupsy We absolutely would need to get someone in there who understands what to do and could do a better job from the get go.
  • Adam fluer 2012/05/12 02:16:02
    Adam
    As long as we think like this there is always going to be someone we need to get out of there. This is what will be used every time to get the fleet to fall into line and accept the moderate candidate rather than one who will hold to principle.
  • Adam Moneyman 2012/05/12 02:14:48
    Adam
    +1
    Me I kind of do a combo. I eliminate every one I think that should not be in the president's office. If there is anyone left I vote for the one I think has the better chance of winning. Once they fall within acceptable parameters then it becomes a matter of winning.
  • Adam fluer 2012/05/12 02:12:01
    Adam
    When the system is broke it is our duty to replace it. Filing in line to vote for what ever is thrown at us will not do this.
  • fluer Adam 2012/05/17 09:54:53
    fluer
    In our system though we have parameters we are bound by and if we don't like either candidate we either have to not vote or vote out the worst guy or against the worst choice. At 63 I have held my nose to vote more times than I can count and not just for President.
  • MandaLynne 2012/05/07 15:28:15
    MandaLynne
    +1
    I'd vote for anyone short of Hitler or Manson to keep Obama out of office. You may not like Romney, but if Obama is re-elected, America as we know it will die.

    So, if you choose to act like a petulant child because you don't like the candidate opposing Obama, that is your right, but you are cutting off your nose to spite your face.
  • betz MandaLynne 2012/05/07 16:52:50
    betz
    +1
    Very nicely stated, MandaLynne.
  • Superman 2012/05/07 15:27:45
    Superman
    +1
    If your candidate can't muster the needed support to win the GOP nomination (let alone come in second or third) and your response it to sit at home and whine about it then you aren't relevent.

    The primary period is the point where we make our choices on the direction of the Party. Its contentious, but at the end of the day it should be a point to come together and move forward.

    Most Romney or Santorum ,etc, supporters would have been prepared to support Paul had he won the nomination. Those voters get it. They're mature enough to move on.

    So go ahead and sit in the corner and pout. Pouting, rather than staying engaged and trying to make your own imprint on the candidates remaining, is sure to make a difference in our nation.
  • Adam Superman 2012/05/07 15:35:25
    Adam
    +1
    I'm not voting for Paul either. There is just an unacceptable range in which I will not vote for certain candidates. Voting for the lesser of 2 evils is what has gotten our country to where it is today. Coming together only works where the issues that differ are not extremely important.
  • Superman Adam 2012/05/07 15:51:17
    Superman
    +1
    So you're even less relevant than I thought. You have no dog in the hunt even in the primary season. You have your political opinion and you're all about complaining but you don't actually want to do the work in making things better or trying to hold to account people that are in office.

    For your knowledge, Romney isn't the lesser of two evils. He's a good option.
  • betz Adam 2012/05/07 16:53:47
    betz
    +1
    Certainly one or the other has to appeal to you in some way. By not voting shows you don't care about this nation IMO.
  • Adam betz 2012/05/07 17:11:36
    Adam
    +1
    Oh I am going to vote. Its just going to be a write in, and no your assumptions that it will be Ron Paul are wrong.
  • betz Adam 2012/05/07 17:53:48
    betz
    Such a shame to waste a vote. Each party will be nominating a candidae and for you to vote for someone else is a waste of your time. Good luck.
  • CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY 2012/05/07 15:16:17
    CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY
    +1
    Then, that's your choice and I believe you will live to regret your decision not to vote for Romney.

    If there ever was an election in our lifetimes wherein the longevity and future of our Country was in doubt if the incumbent wins, this would have to be it.
  • Adam CUDDLY ... 2012/05/07 15:36:14
    Adam
    To me one is just faster than the other.
  • CUDDLY ... Adam 2012/05/07 15:38:18
    CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY
    Your choice.

    Elections DO have consequences.
  • Adam CUDDLY ... 2012/05/07 15:45:02
    Adam
    +1
    Yes they do and the consequences of not upholding candidates to a certain standard is what has left us where we are. We should have thrown almost every politician out of office by now. But we aren't we keep voting them in.
  • CUDDLY ... Adam 2012/05/07 15:46:01
    CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY
    And your candidate is? Lemme guess ..........

    Dr Ron Paul?
  • Adam CUDDLY ... 2012/05/07 15:47:22
    Adam
    negativo, I was supporting Rick Santorum, but his reason for leaving has me thinking of writing someone else in.
  • CUDDLY ... Adam 2012/05/07 15:49:28
    CUDDLY BUT STILL CRABBY
    Go for it.

    Santorum to me was too "holier than thou". I question the motives of someone who takes his dead fetus home so his kids can witness such tragic circumstance. That's more than a little too weird for me.
  • rdmatheny CUDDLY ... 2012/05/07 15:49:56
    rdmatheny
    Yes they do. Bush to Clinton to Bush to Obama to Obama Lite?

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/09/16 00:56:35

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals