Read this, then jump on Romney Bandwagon!

There are still so many yahoos who call Romney a liberal, a lightweight or a big government spender, so I will give you some of Romney's record as governor of Taxachusetts so as to set the record straight once and for all.

Any Republican governor of a blue state who manages to balance the budget without raising taxes should be a nominee for Mount Rushmore, to say nothing of president.

Governor Romney had to contend with a 200-person state Legislature that included only 29 Republicans. Romney inherited a huge, Democrat-created budget deficit. The existing Massachusetts deficit was already more than half a billion dollars when Romney took office halfway through a fiscal year, with a projected deficit of $3 billion for the following year.

And yet, Romney balanced Massachusetts' budget each year he was in office and left the state with a surplus, without raising taxes.

To the contrary, every single budget Romney submitted included income tax cuts--all of which were rejected by the 85-percent Democratic Legislature. (The last time Massachusetts legislators approved an income tax cut was when it was attached to a bill raising their own salaries by 55 percent.)

Romney balanced the budget by slashing spending, eliminating ridiculous corporate tax loopholes and increasing user fees for government services consumed by only some citizens, such as court filings, taking the bar exam, boating, hunting and golf licenses.

He cut state spending by $600 million, including reducing his own staff budget by $1.2 million, and hacked the largest government agency, Health and Human Services, down from 13 divisions to four. He did this largely by persuading the Legislature to give him emergency powers his first year in office to cut government programs without their consent.

Although Romney was not able to get any income tax cuts past the Democratic Legislature, he won other tax cuts totaling nearly $400 million, including a one-time capital gains tax rebate and a two-day sales tax holiday for all purchases under $2,500.

He also vetoed more bills than any other governor in Massachusetts history, before or since. He vetoed bills concerning access to birth control, more spending on state zoos, and the creation of an Asian-American commission--all of which were reversed by the Legislature.

Romney left his successor, Deval Patrick, Democrat and friend of Obama, with a "rainy day fund" of $2.1 billion, more than tripled from $640 million when Romney took office. (Of course, as soon as Romney was gone, Patrick raided the rainy day fund, increased government spending and raised taxes.)

Meanwhile, when he was in Congress, Santorum wouldn't even vote to eliminate federal funding for the National Endowment for the Arts.

Mitt Romney has spent no time in Washington. He was a rabidly frugal fiscal conservative in a state where cutting government spending was as foreign an idea as it is in Washington today.

Do you think a man who slashed government spending in North Korea, put the corrupt and financially bleeding Olympics on solid financial footing and rescued dozens of companies from bankruptcy would consider a photo of a bullwhip stuck in a man's buttocks a wise investment of the taxpayers' money?....Human Events

With Romney winning the Tea Party vote in Illinois by 10%, and with the Tea Party leader Jim Demint and having Jeb Bush both give their support to Romney by calling on Newt and Santorum to come together behind Romney, don't you think its time for all of us to jump aboard the fiscally sound champion-- Conservative Romney's bandwagon?

 

i wonder how many conservitives can say that phrase and pass a lie detector

 

The question is: if you're a conservative and there are at least two viable candidates, one of which is more conservative than the other, shouldn't you vote for the more conservative of the two in your state primary, even if you're pretty sure the other candidate will win.
Romney represents the liberal wing of the Republican party, and this campaign has demonstrated that that wing represents between 30 to 40% of Republican voters with large variation by state. That is important to know. (In 2008 McCain also represented the left wing of the party, but with a brighter personality that gave him victories in key states and prompted Romney to withdraw prematurely.) What other liberals have done well in Republican presidential primaries?
I've been racking my brain to remember if any candidate has ever won a primary after being mathematically eliminated from a first-ballot victory. I think the answer is no, and Santorum will be eliminated in late April. Then I hope Ron Paul will win some states at the end just to make a point.
Conservatives have to vote for Romney in November, but they don't have to like it.

 

Romney is a compassionate conservative. Bush said he was, but Romney is one. No he is not far right wing. He leans a bit more toward the middle because he is compassionate about humanity. He is a hard worker and determined to right this country on its collective feet once more.

 

Please stop fooling yourself.

Romney is a life long independent moderate, of course until about June 2011 he has claimed to be conservitive.

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Romney-Was-Independent-Not/2012/01/28/id/425824

as soon as he's done pandering to cons, he'll go back to being his Obama self.

 

The truth is always hidden from people who wear the blindfold of ignorance.

 

then i suggest you take them off

 

Funny as you are the one with the blindfold.

 

Denial is more than just a river in Egypt my friend and you are all wet.

 

When Romney received inheritance money from his parents, he gave it all away to charity. All of it. Then made himself wealthy. He never said a thing about it (like the other candidates probably would have) until Bill O' Reilly brought it up with him on The Factor.

People need to start looking for things like this.

 

The issue is not what Romney is or is not. He will be the Republican Candidate against obama.

So the issue is. Is Romney better than obama?

I'd say overwhelmingly YES. Romney is experienced. Romney has accomplished politics on both sides of the isle. Romney has more economic knowledge and experience in his pinky than b.o. will ever acquire in 10 lifetimes.
Does Romney need to be perfect? No just needs to be better than obama and that is child's play, all 4 Republican primary candidates are better than obama and I don't think much of Paul or Santorum.

Its like when you and another person are running away from an angry bear. You don't have to outrun the bear. You just have to outrun the other person.

 

that is a factually incorrect statement. His father died in 95, Mitt started Bain Capital in 84 so he was already rich when he received his inheritance from his father.


He also had alot of help "on his own" attending Stanford with a comfortable allowance from his father. Him and his wife never had to work while raising a family and studying at BYU, and at Harverd his parents bought him a house. not to mention name recognition and family conenctions which helped him start his business.

 

Your choice in Nov. will be obama or Romney. You can pick who you think is best.

 

lol you call that a choice?

Second Term:

Shall it be Republican or Democrat Obama?

 

Those ARE your choices, and yes I call it a choice because it is a choice. You may also sit out the elections and just gripe. That always solves something.

I did NOT say these are the choices that you must love. Just listed the choices as they will be in Nov.

 

I will definitely vote for Romney if he's nominated. I'm still not sure we won't have a Contested Convention.

I almost feel sorry for the gullible, ignorant ones voting for Obama. Kinda sad really.

 

actually there will be a few more choices then Obama, and Obama on the ballot then.

 

Try that again. I haven't a clue what you're saying.

 

Romney will have more than 1144 fully bound delegates before the convention. There will not be a contested convention. It will all be over but the whining in a month.

 

You may be correct. Are you ever wrong?

 

To support Mitt is to support a liberal republican party. I will not do that.

I will vote for neither Mitt nor Obama. The loser will blame folks like me but I am a conservative and that’s what I vote for. I will not have the establishment dictate who I vote for. It’s sad to see cowards in the Republican Party sell it out to liberals the way they are. Hell even the Tea Party sold out. What’s the freaking point of the tea party if they support everything they are supposed to be against?

Obama will destroy Mitt in the general election. But if by some miracle Mitt wins, then he will destroy the Republican Party for good. It will be two left wing parties’ one extreme and one moderate. Ill be looking for the third party to form. One that is actually Conservative.

 

YES,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,rarely, and wildly, and occasionally hilariously.

 

Libertarian Party and American Elect will have a canidate on the ballot in most if not all states.

 

Your CHOICES will be Romney or obama or a pass or a wasted vote.

So one of 2 choices or a joke.

 

That way of thinking is what dooms Nations when they feel they have to sell out or vote against their beliefs for the "Lesser of Two Evils". It's failed Policy which has only brought upon the most Corrupt American Government in a long time...