Mitt Romney - Says no to "Marriage Vow," Stands Alone - Polidicks

[url]http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2011/07/mitt-romney-refuses-to-sign-controversial-conservative-vow[/url] [release] Two of the former Massachusetts governor's opponents, Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum, made headlines last week when they signed "The Marriage Vow," which is being pushed by Family Leader, an influential Christian conservative Iowa group. The pledge also states that homosexuality is a choice and health risk, calls for rejecting Sharia law and appointing faithful constitutionalists as judges. Candidates who sign on must also pledge fidelity to their spouses. Family Leader CEO Bob Vander Plaats has said his group would not endorse any candidates that did not sign the pledge. Andrea Saul, Romney's spokeswoman, told The Associated Press in a written statement Tuesday that Romney "strongly supports traditional marriage" but the oath "contained references and provisions that were undignified and inappropriate for a presidential campaign." The pledge's introduction came under fire when it was first circulated last week. It stated that African-American children were more likely to be raised in two-parent households when they were born into slavery than they are today. Family Leader officials apologized and deleted the passage from the pledge. Bachmann claimed she was only endorsing the "candidate vow" and not the intro. And a spokesman for Santorum said the ex-Pennsylvania senator thinks the group did the right thing by removing the slavery passage. A recent Des Moines Register poll shows Bachmann and Romney in a virtual dead heat in the Hawkeye State with 23% and 22% respectively.[/release] When you look at the barrel full of monkeys the GOP/Tea Party has put out for 2012, I really think Romney is the only serious GOP candidate. Bachmann only helps his case too, because she seems so inflexible and unpresidential next to him. I'd love to see Romney nominated too; I preferred him over McCain in 2008, even though I would really have to think hard between Romney and Obama for 2012.

He's the only serious GOP candidate, but he's Mormon. The vast majority of the conservative voting block won't vote for him because they don't consider him a True Christian™. I hope Obama enjoys his second term in office.

That's a strong possibility, especially in areas that aren't as open-minded. But, then again, Glenn Beck is a Mormon and he has a huge following of Conservatives. I think there's no doubt about it, though, that Obama is going to have a 2nd term. The country just doesn't feel ready for another GOP president.

Edit

Wait what? How is he standing alone, only two of out nine candidates signed it, and there would be no way Ron Paul or Gary Johnson would ever sign it. Even more, why are people saying Mitt has no chance at winning? He's on the top in everything but straw polls (which Ron Paul always wins). Yes it's early polling and it too early to say who is going to win, but Mitt has the best chance according to the data. [url]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html[/url]

[QUOTE=Pepin;31097965]Wait what? How is he standing alone, only two of out nine candidates signed it, and there would be no way Ron Paul or Gary Johnson would ever sign it. Even more, why are people saying Mitt has no chance at winning? He's on the top in everything but straw polls (which Ron Paul always wins). [url]http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html[/url][/QUOTE] atm he stands alone as the only Republican who has made any official statement that wasn't supporting it. Also yeah, Romney has strong chances compared to his party. It's really more the reverse: going against Obama is going to be tough.

I'm just saying. I'm not ready for a mormon president.

[QUOTE=Reimu;31098016]atm he stands alone as the only Republican who has made any official statement that wasn't supporting it.[/QUOTE] Do Paul and Johnson have to make a statement on it? I don't think they do because they obviously would never support it. The other candidates could be smart and get some easy publicity by giving their own views on it, but I don't think most of them do because their views are already well establish. [QUOTE=Nikota;31098133]I'm just saying. I'm not ready for a mormon president.[/QUOTE] As much as I don't like Romney, I don't find it very rational to care about his religion. I understand that many people are anti-religious and would prefer an atheistic president, but I don't all see religion as a factor in whether I would want them to be president, but I'd rather judge them based on their political philosophy and what the claim to want to do. Don't care at all about their personal life.

[QUOTE=Nikota;31098133]I'm just saying. I'm not ready for a mormon president.[/QUOTE] More important would be his views on the issues. Which i'm sure are nothing anyone on Facepunch would disagree with anyway

[QUOTE=Pepin;31098225]Do Paul and Johnson have to make a statement on it? I don't think they do because they obviously would never support it.[/QUOTE] Well, "Stands Alone" sounds much more dramatic!

[QUOTE=Reimu;31098286]Well, "Stands Alone" sounds much more dramatic![/QUOTE] Yeah I guess so. I need to remember that this is "Sensationalist Headlines", though now I'm wondering if that's the correct grammar.

I wish Romney would run in 16 instead of 12. He might actually win, because the likelyhood of the Dems having a strong candidate then is pretty low.

Mitt would be the only GOP candidate I'd support if it wasn't for the fact I hate Republicans more than democrats. He's a republican that I respect though.

[QUOTE=Sourcream&onion;31098378]I wish Romney would run in 16 instead of 12. He might actually win, because the likelyhood of the Dems having a strong candidate then is pretty low.[/QUOTE] I'd suggest the chances are pretty high. Democratic candidates usually come out nowhere. Obama and Clinton are great examples of this. Republican candidates are usually more built up and established. Who's most likely to win in 2016? No clue, but I think the more independent candidate will win.

It pisses me off that fundies complain about the lack of family values and all the single mothers. At the same time they also don't want mothers to have any abortions, which would reduce the amount of single mother without a doubt. [editline]13th July 2011[/editline] It flies in the face of what makes sense.

[QUOTE=Nikota;31098133]I'm just saying. I'm not ready for a mormon president.[/QUOTE] congrats you are supporting the theocracy

As likely as it looks that Romney is going to be the Republican candidate, I would really love if Ron Paul or Gary Johnson got the nomination, then they would actually have a chance, and a whole slew of new issues could get debated as opposed to the tired old gays/who do we invade next/abortion thing. (although I'm pretty sure Paul is against abortion and I don't know where Johnson stands.) [editline]13th July 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Mattk50;31099227]congrats you are supporting the theocracy[/QUOTE] How would not wanting a Mormon president SUPPORT theocracy, if anything it condemns it. [editline]13th July 2011[/editline] Joseph Smith supported a Theocratic Monarchy.

The theocracy is the idea that people of MY religious beliefs should be president, and the laws based off of that. MINE MINE MINE! A LOT of Christians showed opposition to the idea of a Mormon president.

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;31099811]The theocracy is the idea that people of MY religious beliefs should be president, and the laws based off of that. MINE MINE MINE! A LOT of Christians showed opposition to the idea of a Mormon president.[/QUOTE] It's because Mormons are fucking crazy. Even a bit crazy for them maybe.

[QUOTE=Novistador;31099287]As likely as it looks that Romney is going to be the Republican candidate, I would really love if Ron Paul or Gary Johnson got the nomination, then they would actually have a chance, and a whole slew of new issues could get debated as opposed to the tired old gays/who do we invade next/abortion thing. (although I'm pretty sure Paul is against abortion and I don't know where Johnson stands.)[/QUOTE] Paul is against it but thinks there shouldn't be a federal law banning or allowing it. Johnson is for it and says it right out. Abortion is becoming more and more of a non issue because of scientific advancements and education, and a male birth control product will be released sometime soon which should really curb this issue.

[quote]The pledge also states that homosexuality is a choice and health risk, calls for rejecting Sharia law and appointing faithful constitutionalists as judges.[/quote] Um what? How does Sharia law have anything to do with homosexuality clauses? I mean you could link it in some way to marriage, but why is Sharia law even an issue in this? [editline]13th July 2011[/editline] [quote]It stated that African-American children were more likely to be raised in two-parent households when they were born into slavery than they are today.[/quote] Really guys? Really?

I can guarantee Ron Paul wont be nominated. Although he is registered as a republican, his views are completely different to mainstream republican views.

I don't agree with Ron Paul, and I've seen him at times act on the same level as other politicians, but I do have to respect the fact that he sticks to his own views and some of his core issues are also some of the issues Americans aren't comfortable facing. I wouldn't vote for Paul, but if I ever enter a public political office, he'd be a strong inspiration. [QUOTE=markfu;31100640]Um what? How does Sharia law have anything to do with homosexuality clauses? I mean you could link it in some way to marriage, but why is Sharia law even an issue in this?[/QUOTE] It's some conservative CEO trying to get candidates to pander to his views in-exchange for money.

[QUOTE=markfu;31100640]Um what? How does Sharia law have anything to do with homosexuality clauses? I mean you could link it in some way to marriage, but why is Sharia law even an issue in this?[/QUOTE] Because Republicans hate Muslims The politicians probably don't, but if they can monger hate in a group, then that group can be manipulated with such hate. How do you think Hitler united Germany?

You got me there until those generalizations.

here, edited. since pretty much each of the three monotheistic religions harbors (or at least insinuates a need thereof) hate for certain groups of people. just saying Edit: WHAT AM I DOING WRONG, REIMU?

[QUOTE=markfu;31100640]Really guys? Really?[/QUOTE] Not said to say that blacks were better enslaved. Just a sad reflection on the decline of marriage among blacks.

I've never hated anybody based on my religion, nor have the Priests and Bishops I've known. One of our Bishops even got into a heated discussion with another person, cut it short, and just hugged him and said "Sorry." There is a history of abuse like that in religions though, which is totally true. We see that in extremist groups like the Westboro, and even regular preachers who simply can't accept equality. My brother is a clergy member, and he has his own shortcomings about judging others. I was never taught to hate anybody though just because they didn't follow the same guidelines our religion taught us though, just as I've never befriended a Jewish or Muslim person who felt the same way. If anything I was taught to love people more if they were different, and to realize that religious institutions weren't necessarily perfect.

I'd vote for Mitt Romeny. As a Libertarian, I believe that economic and social freedom are equally important. Social Conservatism is on the way out, and gays deserve equal rights, regardless of personal morals. Obama has also led this country very poorly, and a change in leadership is greatly needed. Ron Paul would be a great candidate as well, but the chances of him winning are slim to none.

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;31102088]Obama has also led this country very poorly, and a change in leadership is greatly needed.[/QUOTE] Hmm, would you be able to expand on that? Not that I want to argue about it, just curious.