If The Two-Party System Gave You Rick Perry And Ron Paul Who Would You Vote For?

I'd.....move.

 

The point is not whether or not Romney believes in the "right" things, but how willing he is to flip flop. You say he is seeing the light and changing his ways for the better, but who's to say that he isn't doing that just to get your vote? Who's to say he won't change again the moment he takes office? He flip flopped before and just because it was in the "right" direction doesn't mean he won't flip flop again.

 

I know someone who works at giving out food stamps. According to her most people coming in look very irresponsible often very many tattoos the money for which could have been spent better. Many try to cheat so as to save money and in all the other places they get away with it every time. Now this is according to someone who is actually in this job.

 

Oh well... how better to judge an entire group than by one person's anecdotal local experiences based on eyeballing people?

And not everyone on foodstamps has always been on foodstamps. What if somebody got a tattoo while at a steady job... then lost the job? What if someone got a tattoo for free because his friend's a tattoo artist?
Is your friend in any position to know exactly when or how a tattoo was acquired by a complete stranger.

And so what should we do about it?
1. Spend more money to oversee the cheating in a precise manner
2. Set high blunt policy barriers and cut off people who aren't cheating (CLUE: the cheaters will find new ways to cheat; the honest people are screwed)

Sorry, pal. I've worked in a variety of service positions.
Here's something you'll notice:
Every person who works somewhere sees things through the lens of their own bias.
One person sees only cheaters.
Another sees only poor people hurt by the crappy economy.
Another person sees the clock hands moving (this is most people, I think, but that's just my bias).

 

Because there is no History of Romney ever doing so..
If he ran saying he wanted abortions everyday paid by the state free and for any reason..Then committed to that ..that would be one thing.
All he was was Neutral at the beginning and moved to the right after he was still Governor.

He might have moved in position to give the voters what they wanted..its called being a Statesman..as Clinton..Reagan changed.
But he didn't say he would lower taxes..then raise them.
He didn't say he would ban guns.Nor did he run that way..or govern that way.
He didn't say he would be pro business then be pro union.

The stuff you are continuing to focus and dwell on are nothing compared to what Obama has flipped on in just 3 years..and you are going back 20 years for some stuff.

Every candidate with ANY political career has some stuff like that..including the Paul..Perry and ..

Cain?

Who in just a short year demonized Muslims..and everyone just forgets about that?
The reason Obama was elected was that he was CLEAN,until after we found out the press never vetted him properly.
Romney has been vetted several times..
If he wasn't Mormon this would be a done deal..
and everyone knows it. So vetting a man on his religion..while giving political hacks a free ride.. Cool.

 

JIG...JIG...BRING IT ON..

 

Ron Paul would have my vote and is the most likely to have my vote. I don't agree with every one of his policies, but I can live with them nor regret him.

 

Gary who??o.0