Would a McCain-Romney ticket be winning?

 

A new ABC News/Washington Post poll suggests that Sarah Palin has become a major liability to John McCain, with 52 percent of likely voters stating that the Palin pick "weakens their confidence in his judgment."

Which raises the question: What if McCain had overcome his distaste for Mitt Romney and made him his running mate rather than Palin?

Yes, Mitt probably wouldn't have riled up the conservative base as effectively as Palin. And yes, some voters might have balked at Romney's Mormonism.

That said, while Romney has his faults, he's also a smart dude. He could have appealed to socially moderate, fiscally conservative independents in a way Palin doesn't. And he'd have shored up the McCain campaign's economic credentials at an especially opportune time.

So what do you think? If it were McCain-Romney instead of McCain-Palin, would Barack Obama still be the frontrunner?

Published Oct 20 2008, 12:53 PM by Adam Reilly

• Shaun said:

  I think Obama would still be the front-runner, but I think McCain would have had a much better chance with Romney on the ticket.  Even with Palin and a fraction of the cash that Obama has, McCain is still barely in the running.  Palin, though a very nice lady, has truly been a disappointment in terms of her ability and preparation for the VP office.  Romney would have been much more convincing in terms of McCain's judgment- especially at a time when our nation is going through extreme economic turmoil.

  October 20, 2008 1:51 PM

• Bob Gielman said:

  CLEARLY.  Palin is a hollow symbol.  Mitt Romney may not be as popular with the media, but he would have the confidence of the Republicans with his economic prowess.  But, McCain is a hater.  I don't think he could have gotten over his dislike for Romney; he couldn't even pretend to like Romney.  Too bad... McCain/Romney would have been my vote.  Now I am leaning toward Obama.  

  October 20, 2008 2:10 PM

• Albert Zuniga said:

  McCain-Romney would be winning this election. Romney is one smart guy.

  October 20, 2008 2:11 PM

• Boo said:

  Would a McCain-Romney ticket be leading the polls? Who knows?  But, it would be a horse race and we may be hearing some half decent dialogue on the economy

  October 20, 2008 2:51 PM

• Shelby said:

  Albert Zuniga said:

  "McCain-Romney would be winning this election. Romney is one smart guy."

  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  Couldn't agree more!

  Romney 2012!

  October 20, 2008 3:32 PM

• Shelby said:

  Albert Zuniga said:

  "McCain-Romney would be winning this election. Romney is one smart guy."

  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  I couldn't agree more!

  Romney 2012!

  October 20, 2008 3:56 PM

• James said:

  McCain's biggest mistake was Palin. He needed a top VP pick, and given the economy - Romney, former CEO of Bain would have made the best choice.

  Romney in 2012.

  October 20, 2008 4:17 PM

• paul said:

  Yes, aside from Romney's intelligence, experience, and economic record, he offered much more. 1) Campaign infrastructure. The romney campaign was one of the best run presidential camps ever. He has volunteers and fund raising that no one else came close to.

  2) His personal pocket book and access to high dollar donners. Romney could bring in money - something that mccain and palin have both failed to do.

  3) Battleground advantage. Romney has excellent name recognition and aprroval in the following states: New Hampshire, Nevada, Colorado, Michigan, Massachuses, and Utah. Four of those states are swing states and his presence on the ticket could have made a considerable difference.

  October 20, 2008 4:24 PM

• SamsClubber said:

  Without a doubt Romney would be defeating Obama hands down right now.  It will now be up to Romney to reconstruct the Republican party going into 2010 Congressionals and 2012 Presidential Election.

  October 20, 2008 4:39 PM

• Rick Mave said:

  Would McCain-Romney be ahead in polls?  Maybe.  Would it win?  Probably.  

  Anyway, I've pulled up the ladder and refuse to vote McCain.  Click my name and read my decision as to why.  In short, I'd rather wait 4 years for Romney than to watch McCain fumble around for a term.

  October 20, 2008 6:26 PM

• Dan said:

  McCain/Romney would maybe be ahead in the polls--presuming Little John wouldn't try to bottle Mitt up like he has Sarah Palin, presuming Romney would be understood as the one crafting the economic and domestic policies of the would-be McCain Admin.  

  However, Romney/Whomever would be leading in the polls and and would win the election

  October 20, 2008 6:31 PM

• Brian Flaherty said:

  No way.  Obama came out of his convention on fire and Sarah Palin stole the show from him right away.  If McCain had picked Romney there would have been a huge thud and it would have been a quick one day story.  The news would have gone back to Obama and he would have run away.  Instead, McCain got a huge story and their convention gave them a big bounce.  Romney's convention speech was brutal and was a sign of what he would have brought to the ticket.

  October 20, 2008 8:53 PM

• Brad Deltan said:

  Romney was always a loser of a choice for a simple reason.  The Christian Conservatives that McCain desperately needed to appeal to (hence Palin) could never have gotten past this sentence:

  HE'S A MORMON!!!

  HE'S A MORMON!!!

  HE'S A MORMON!!!

  HE'S A MORMON!!!

  HE'S A MORMON!!!

  HE'S A MORMON!!!

  HE'S A MORMON!!!

  HE'S A MORMON!!!

  To them, that's the same thing as being a Muslim who wasn't born in America and pals around with terrorists.

  Palin was a terrible choice, true.  But let's not forget that before she came along, McCain was straight on track to be ignored to death by the core Republican base he needs.  Viewed in that light, who else could POSSIBLY have filled the bill?  I don't think there was ANYone.  Huckabee poisoned the well with his own run; much how Hillary would come with too much baggage to be Obama's VP, Huckabee would be the same for McCain.  After that...who was there?

  Seriously!  Who was there?  I can't think of anyone else...and I suspect neither could the McCain campaign - otherwise they wouldn't have to dig so deep into the rolodex to drag out Palin.

  October 20, 2008 9:26 PM

• Dan C said:

  It's hard to say if a McCain-Romney ticket would beat Obama.  One thing for sure though is that a McCain-Romney ticket would be much better than McCain-Palin.  

  Not only does Romney bring significant leadership and economic experience...he also has pull in several swing states.  Michigan is Romney's home state, a state that the GOP would love to win.  Romney also has considerable pull in the west with his connections to the Mormon faith.  Nevada and Colorado are both states that Romney won big in the primaries and where a decent number of Mormons reside...atleast enough to make a difference in a close race.  

  Having said all that, I'm kind of glad Romney has nothing to do with the general election...I'm looking to 2012.

  October 20, 2008 9:29 PM

• Mike said:

  Brad, you are spot on.  The bigotry of the Christian Conservatives is why I am leaving the Republican party.

  October 20, 2008 9:58 PM

• Patrick said:

  Its a great question.  I agree with Brian F: we can't forget Palin provided McCain with a strong post convention bounce -- energizing the base and stemming Obama's own bounce; and Romney could not have matched that excitement (especially considering his dud of a speech - 'yeah its all those liberals in Washington mucking everything up').  BUT the excitement over Palin was short lived and overall, she's become a drag on the ticket (just ask Colin Powell). AND with economic matters dominating the news, Romney probably could have thrown McCain a desperately needed rope.  BUT if he never had that bounce at the convention, maybe Romney's assistance in the last few weeks would be too little, too late.

  October 20, 2008 10:25 PM

• brock said:

  Yeah go away Brian, you imbecile.  

  Bro, I read that Rick Mave guy's blog and it sounded pretty much just how I would say it.  The Republican party is being trashed by guys like Brian and his brand of Huckabeean bullcrap.  

  The funniest part about it all is that McCain didn't need Palin whatsoever.  That's just what he has said to give himself cover from being too petty to give us Romney.  The fact of the matter is that all the evangelical nutters that Palin caters to would turn out to vote for McCain anyway b/c to them, obviously, the Supreme Court nominations is a constant cause to vote Republican anyway.  Especially when they see the other name in the race is Barack Obama.  And despite their very unchristian bashing of Mormonism, they would even had turned out to vote for Mitt Romney if he were on the top half of the ticket.  

  On the other hand, actual, educated conservatives who don't spend all their time going to Baptist hootenanny's, huntin' quail, watchin' NA-CAR, and listenin' ta Trace Adkins have a proven record of not showing up to vote for lousy candidates, which McCain and Palin each are.  McCain-Romney would've pulled us into the booth.  McCain-Palin gives us reason to pay McCain back for his record of screwing the Republican Party, and people like you, Brian, by letting Obama win and watching him nominate a couple pro-choicers to the bench.  

  Now with an evangelical leaving the White House in a few months, and leaving it in poor shape, and the Republicans left in even worse shape, in ruins really, by the impact of evangelicals calling all the shots, checklisting petty cultural quirks above all else, we have a party that is ripe for reconstruction.  I think it'll respond better and Mitt Romney will do well for himself as the party, prior to the religious right's disproportionate influence got out of control, was always about being fiscally conservative and responsible first, promoting peace and prosperity via free trade and not having an interfering foreign policy...and all this speaks to his talents.  Someone said it last week, and I forget who it was, but Bush came into power on the  backs of the evangelical religious right, on being social conservatives, being against nation-building, and now they leave the White House as conservative socialists where the US Treasury owns just about everything, oh and we got a couple of huge, giant nation building projects sucking away our resources and wealth in the worst neighborhood on the planet surface....lol, and we're sittng around worrying about someone being a member of the LDS church?  Jesus, we deserve to lose the next 3 elections if that's how stupid people in our party have become.

  October 20, 2008 10:52 PM

• Dan said:

  Who cares about a post-convention bounce?  That's an outrage to read as if it were some sort of necessary shot of life that McCain needed.  Granted it was a pop for him and it stomped on Obama's greek god reception at the DNC.  But guess what gang, that was a short term tactic.  McCain stupidly picked someone that neutered the core of his campaign against Obama being too inexperienced for the job by rushing out, not vetting, then picking the one person he could find who had less experience than Bare!  Country first?  HA!  Country last is right, Rick Mave.  

  So then McCain shifted from ripping inexperience to trying to question judgement, and that got no traction cuz he was playing semantics at best.  So then it turned into going after Bill Ayers, all the while Wall Street began to crumble and when people began wondering what Mitt Romney was up to, articles trickled in and then poured in about should McCain dump Palin and pick Romney b/c that would be Country First, afterall, so then McCain  pulls one of his stupid stunts to parade in DC in an attempt to get out of the first debate, and everyone laughed at him.  

  Guys, he is an embarassing candidate and one who backed into the nomination because Mike Huckabee wielded religous bigotry, splitting consrevatives from Romney.  McCain is just doing what he always has done by on one hand screwing his own party and on the other doing political stunts and looking like an old fool.  This is what we get for having the religious right hold too much sway in our party.  

  October 20, 2008 10:58 PM

• LAL said:

  Absolutely McCain would be leading. I'm a liberal democrat, but I think that McCain would be killing Obama with the experienced Romney on the ticket.

  Plus with his connections John McCain would be rolling in the money.

  October 20, 2008 11:03 PM

• Windsor3 said:

  There is no doubt in my mind that had John McCain selected Mitt Romney as his running mate, that the Republicans would be in a much greater position to win this election.  Hindsight may teach a lesson to the Evangelicals who rejected a fine man of integrity, principles, and moral ethics.  His success in the business sector and his knowledge in the arena of world finance would have brought a lot of strength to the McCain ticket.  Like others who have expressed their opinion, I too, will hope that Mitt will run again in 2012.

  October 21, 2008 12:48 AM

• Igneous said:

  Mitt Romney is only too relieved not to be tied down by the old fashioned politician that McCain is. Romney is the type of guy who people have strong feelings about. Either they love him or hate him. He is quick on his feet and makes smooth talkers like Obama look like fools. McCain lets Obama run his mouth in the debates and only challenges him periodically with slow and entirely forgettable lines. Its makes me sick to think that he won the nomination via cross-party voting. It was quite clear that the democrats didn't want Romney too get the nomination and later the VP slot. This whole election makes me sick. The most powerful idea that has been forced on me this election is truth doesn't always prevail in democracy and that I am not eligible to govern the nation that my family members have fought for because of my religion.

  October 21, 2008 12:54 AM

• Gary said:

  Romney would be kicking Obama's butt right now with the economic crisis.  Obama is a socialist idiot when it comes to the economy but the problem is is that McCain isn't that smart on the economy either. Sigh. If only the Florida Primary had gone Romney's way instead of McCain...

  October 21, 2008 1:00 AM

• sentinal said:

  The persecution of Mormons is one of america's best kept secrets. Has there ever been genocide in America? Yes, in the late 1830's a state extermination order was declared on all mormons resulting in murder, rape, and the maurdering of the Joseph Smith and other mormon leaders. It was legal to murder mormons in missouri until the late 1980's. Today, anti-mormonism is a multi-million dollar industry in America. When Utah was finally allowed statehood, the existing name, deseret, was rejected by congress and replaced with the name "Utah" a name from an indian tribe in the southwest notorious for not wearing clothes. This was ment as an insult. Fullfilling a phrophecy of Isaiah.

  October 21, 2008 1:22 AM

• Bill Fitzgerald said:

  Hey Brad,  Nice try in your attempt to hide your bigotry. However it was obvious to me. your comments prove that you know nothing about mormonism.

  October 21, 2008 7:58 AM

• Brock said:

  Igneous, well said bro.  I think Romney certainly has his eyes on 2012.  So it's my mission to make sure McCain loses in 14 days from now--and if that means I vote Obama, well then I'll do what I gotta do.  

  Being thumped hard out of congressional power in the previous midterms, losing the White House, and watching the tailights of the Democrats get further away in congress should be all the medicine the social conservatives, religious right, or Evangelicals need to understand that they don't always have to have one of them in the White House, and that sometimes things other than cultural preference actually are much more important.  

  I'm not Mormon nor am I an Evangelical.  I attended an Episcopal school my entire life, so if I must check a box somewhere that's the one it would be.  My personal set of beliefs are even barer than that since I'm effectively a Deist for all intents and purposes, and I view virtually all organized religions as both forms of law and man's attempt to reach God--and view all that teach you to be good as good and valid.  I also beleive that most religious people are religious because they were brought up in whatever church their parents attended and have been educated to believe it.  In other words, believers and followers of any faith should have in common core principles and striven for morality.  Values that clearly Mitt Romney has lived better than the vast majority of us.  I think that was part of the problem with him.  He seemed too perfect and so people wanted to tear him down with being a phony.  Well I'm sorry but you don't live that kind of an accomplished life and raise kids like the way his turned out if you're phony.  I thought he was an empty suit too, until I did my own research.  The more I read, the more I liked and I realized my first impression was wrong.  And there's a silver lining, isn't there, in that Romney actually got more of the Evangelical vote than even Mike one-of-them Huckabee did. But the presence of bigotry and hatred, even, was very apparent to me and I'm sorry to see you get subjected to it.  Most mormons I've known or observed are pretty much like everyone else who strives to live up to their faith, and they are good people with classic, family-centric American values, I'll add.  

  So I think getting embarassed out of national power in the White House, House, and Senate will force the Republicans to rediscover their roots.  Like Rick Mave above said, to recapture pragmatism since that is truly what conservatism is.  And definitely what Romney is, a pragmatist.  Promote peace and prosperity via free trade.  Fight for smaller, more efficient and less redundant government.  Hold to a non-interventionist foreign policy.  Promote good morality and ethics, but not conduct more-righteous-than-thou litmus tests and act exclusionary of those who are less pious or who do not attend the same church or any church whatsoever.  I think Romney will rise to the top in the next few years as the man turning around the Republican Party which is in a Maverick flat spin straight out to sea.

  October 21, 2008 9:51 AM

• Tom said:

  The fact that we're even talking about What If McCain had picked a different VP proves that McCain is inadequate himself if he needed a deal-sweatener to get people to vote for him.  Especially when Obama picked Biden, a bad pick, and it neither hurts his chances nor even is discussed openly as a bad pick.

  McCain's luckily-nominated candidacy was conditional (to me...and full disclosure given the creeping mormon-bashing here...I'm not Mormon) on who he picked as VP and so when he tried to convince us all that if he dies like his dad did in his 70's that we'll be better led by Palin than Romney, McCain lost any hope of my vote.  

  Now I'm mroe than happy to see him lose, and to be honest relieved that Romney wouldn't have to struggle as a handcuffed VP to McCain who clearly wants all the glory.  

  October 21, 2008 9:57 AM

• KH said:

  Yes, McCain would be in a much better position today if he had picked Romney, just as Obama would have been better off if he had picked Hillary.  I just watch as this whole election has unfolded and it seems to me that each side wants to lose.  Who in their right mind would choose someone with little to no experience with all the baggage Palin  has over someone who has run a successful business, a multi-national event, and a state?  

  I plan on hunkering down for the next two years and then set out my signs for Mitt in my front yard.

  As far as members of the LDS faith, they are good people and shame on Americans who have decided that they are not real Christians and believe in some convoluted idea that "Moromons" believe in a Christ and not "THE" Christ.  Hopefully after being humbled by four years of either of these candidates, Americans will realize that they let a good man America needed right now at this particular time get away because he was one of those "Mormons" who donates his tithes, serves in his church, helped serve his country anyway he could without pay, loves America because he understands its roots, and raised a beautiful family with his wife where everyone still loves each other and are on track to continue the traditions of their fathers. Whoa, you sure don't want anyone like that in the White House.

  October 21, 2008 10:19 AM

• zune said:

  Hells yes a Romney ticket would be winning.  I have proof.  Watch him kick Obama's tail in 2012.  Glad he didn't get dragged down my McCain's stupidity.

  October 21, 2008 10:34 AM

• RICK MAVE said:

  I'm only further encouraged by reading all these comments that seem to be from people who are also content to not vote for McCain and wait for Romney in 4 years.  

  I hope we all are encouraging people we actually know to do the same as well.  

  bethemaverick.blogspot.com

  October 21, 2008 11:20 AM

• David said:

  Brad Delton, It is to bad that the Mormon thing has stood in the way for Christian Conservatives because without the Mormon vote, the GOP is now losing. For a century, Mormons have considered themselves a part of the Christian Conservative voting bloc. But, now many Mormons are leaving the Christian Conservative bloc simply because of the bad taste in their mouths from the way they have been treated.

  As we can now plainly see from the polls, the christian conservative movement is going through a slow and painful death. There ranks are now seperated and segregated with little to no hope of reviving to the pinacle they once knew.

  October 21, 2008 11:49 AM

• Dan said:

  www.foxnews.com/.../0,2933,442204,00.html

  ^See Mitt trying not to acknowledge the obvious as Cavuto inquires about how things might be different had McCain selected Romney, lol.  

  And it's so pathetic that Mitt Romney can better articulate whatever it is that McCain's trying to propose in one interview than McCain can as THE freaking Republican Nominee with the entire stage all to himself for months.  Hilarious really.  

  Let's keep the powder dry.  Live to fight another day.  Let McCain go down in defeat.  ROMNEY 2012

  October 21, 2008 12:55 PM

• DB said:

  The trouble with many Christians who bash Mormons is that they've simply never met one. To them it's just some weird, unknown group--perhaps affiliated with the polygamists in Texas. But the fact is that Mormons live in large numbers throughout the western United States and indeed settled much of the western United states. Many are famous. They run or have run some of the countries largest and best known corporations (e.g. Kodak, Black & Decker, Fisher Price), they are actors (e.g. Wilford Brimley, Aaron Eckhart, Gordon Jump, Rick Schroder), radio personalities (Glenn Beck), and lead the US Senate (Harry Reid). But most are just quiet citizens who respect others, love God, and try to live moral, upright lives. Most would give the shirt off their back to help someone in need (and literally did during the Katrina disaster), including even "Christians" who seem to hate them so much.

  I hope we can leave this bigotry behind and unite around a common set of political ideals.

  October 21, 2008 2:05 PM

• Jake T. said:

  Honestly I have been conflicted, but now I see I dont HAVE to vote McCain.  No I dont want Palin either.  But I can sleep at night knowing Romney will fix things in 2012.  I wont vote Obama, but libertarian seems right for me (this year only)

  October 21, 2008 2:16 PM

• Shelby said:

  Apparently, McCain should have listened to Rove and selected Romney, rather than listening to Billy Kristol (fire Kristol!!!), according to this article:

  The Daily Beast, Oct. 10, 2008

  Palin's Talent Scout

  by Scott Horton

  "No wonder Bill Kristol has remained so positive about her while other neocons have fled. He helped push her to the veep ticket-and won out against Karl Rove."

  More:

  www.opednews.com/.../Palin-s-Talent-Scout-by-Scott-Horton-081010-701.html

  October 21, 2008 2:21 PM

• Shelby said:

  DB -

  I totally agree! As an evangelical myself, I am sickened by the bigotry of the Taliban-right! Living in WA State, I have two very good friends whom are Mormons. Also, while watching  ABC's "Dancing With The Stars" last night, I couldn't help noticing how adorable both Julliane and Derek, the sister and brother Mormon professional dancers, are as they tease each other while competing for the prize. They show that Mormons can be fun, and I'm thinking a lot of folks would be shocked to know they are of the Mormon faith, as they are so talented and entertaining, and Julliane is absolutely gorgeous. The results show is on tonight—check it out if you’ve not seen these two wonderful Mormons!

  Romney rocks for 2012!

  October 21, 2008 2:41 PM

• Larry said:

  It's the economy stupid.  An no one would be better equipped to debate the economy and provide credible proposals then Mitt Romney.  McCain/Romney would have played to the strengths of both men, let McCain handle the wars while Romney addresses the economy.  But McCain thinks more about himself and his petty dislikes of Romney than what is better for the country.

  October 21, 2008 3:06 PM

• Darrell said:

  Romney has obviously been distancing himself from the McCain campaign, except for the token interview.

  Republicans: McCain has no chance. He is too many sandwiches short of the Nov. 4th picnic. Palin is embarrassing. Stay home on the 4th and let's get Romney in the White House in 2012.

  This life-long conservative is sacrificing McCain (the next 4 years) and staying home.

  October 21, 2008 3:17 PM

• Rick Mave said:

  Darrell....why stop there?  If you're intent not only on staying home but getting Romney in 4 years, why not do as I'm doing and write-in Romney on this year's ballot?  I'm encouraging everyone I know who is uneasy or dissatisfied with McCain to instead of protesting the vote, to do something positive for the future by writing-in Mitt to encourage him on for next time, and to help nudge the direction of the party that way, leaning into the next cycle.  

  October 21, 2008 4:49 PM

• Sean said:

  What happened to the nomination?  How did we end up with McCain?  Oh yes, those geniuses in Iowa.  And Charlie Christ making a bid for VP.  It should have been Romney at the top of the ticket.

  October 21, 2008 5:32 PM

• Gary said:

  I am leaving the republican party also.  I've come to realize my own party is made up of some real fascist bigot-catholic-muslim-mormon hating rednecks.  If you're not protestant a believe in their way of thinking, you aren't part of America.

  October 21, 2008 5:46 PM

• golfing24-7 said:

  The problem unfortunately for Romney is that the  Mormon church has yet to come clean on it's history.  There needs to be some disinfecting sunshine on the beginnings of the LDS church, including Joseph Smith's unspoken and untaught dealings with polyandry.  Having said that though, I can separate the man from the religion he was raised.  It is a rather benign religion today which teaches good values.  I am glad to see that Romney is not involved in this year's scrum.  With the exception of his dabble into the universal health care socialist program, he is rather fiscally conservative.  In four years he'll have some serious mopping up to do and will be a perfect fit at the top of the ticket.  

  October 21, 2008 11:43 PM

• MarkA said:

  While I agree with the gist of nearly all comments above, I would strongly advise that we all set aside our disdain for McCain, and vote for the republican ticket.  McCain/ Palin, while not ideal, just "might" prevent our country from becoming socialist in the next 4 years!

  Set the grudge aside.  Frankly, I just can't imagine the damage which will occur under Obama influence, with full legislative and executive branch alignment; influence in the U.S. and unfortunately, in the world.

  October 22, 2008 2:56 AM

• Ross said:

  Romney - Jindal in 2012

  October 22, 2008 8:54 AM

• Rick Mave said:

  You see Mark A, it's not as if we were unwilling to set the grudge aside.  And by the grudge I mean all of McCain's previous and career infractions, not just the ones he implemented against Romney in the primary and most notably in Florida.  All that needed to happen was for our nominee, John McCain, to lead the way in forgiving and forgetting and select Romney as VP.  But no, McCain couldn't put his own grudge-holding behind him, he couldn't swallow his pride and do what the majority of Republicans wanted and what the GOP delegates overwhelmingly supported in their VP straw poll and pick Romney.  McCain-Romney is actually an appealing ticket to anyone who is sensible and honest as it complements strength & strength as we are faced with great global crises in war and finance.  McCain would've freed himself from the burden of mundane economic and domestic policy by delegating that to the most capable person around on the matters, giving himself all the freedom of his remaining days to pursue his passion of foreign policy.  Instead, he chose to hold grudges, he chose not to swallow his pride and put country first, and so I see no reason to reward him with my vote.  Voting for the Lesser-Of-Two-Evils is not a winning strategy and so when that's your nominee's highest draw, the most popular reason to vote for him, well then it won't matter if you and I vote for him or not because he is going to get thumped, trounced and embarassed on election day.  So it's a matter of principle to me...McCain could've had my vote, could've had my forgiveness, but he didn't demonstrate the same capacity to begin with, and he's the one who needs us more than we need him.  

  October 22, 2008 9:33 AM

• Spencer said:

  Golfing, I'm curious how you know so much about unspoken and untaught dealings.  Are they in some unread book or unseen photo?  And what's it got to do with elections?  Either you got dirt on Romney or not, don't be all mysterious.

  October 22, 2008 12:29 PM

• David said:

  The comment, "The problem unfortunately for Romney is that the  Mormon church has yet to come clean on it's history," is more than likely made by an evangelical "Christian," since few others would care. So as a Mormon, let me just say that fair's fair. Why don't you first come clean on your history (including, incidentally exactly how your Church's conception of the Trinity was reached). And by the way, since you seem to be concerned about Smith's polygamy, you might throw in a helpful explanation or two about Biblical polygamy while you're discussing your history.

  October 22, 2008 2:03 PM

• Brock said:

  Every religion is good that teaches man to be good; and I know of none that instructs him to be bad.

  --Thomas Paine

  Any system of religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be true.

  --Thomas Paine

  Ok, though you may read those two quotes in direct opposition to each other, they actually speak to different elements of faith or religion.  The first quote speaks to the evidence of religion being mankind's attempt to reach out to God and to be good.  The second speaks to the evidence that people practicing religion get carried away with the literal meanings or particular preachings within their own brands of religion or worship.  

  There is no sane reason for a literal intepretation as I, a raised Episcopalian, can find absurdity in any scripture, which by the way, speaking of coming clean on matters, the Bible was voted on by mysterious and nameless men of "The Church" who determined which books would qualify as THE 'word of God' and therefore make it the book.  

  I would doubt God would employ men of any stripe to be the ones to deliver his word.  To me the existence of life, and creation of the universe are the only true word of God since that's the thing man cannot pretend to have created--though far too many liberals like to pretend that the odds of Chance being the cause of the universe are greater than God (or some intelligent designer, lol).  

  The point is, I'm pretty sure it's not like when you die, that you have a Jewish line, a Muslim line, a Baptist line, a Mormon line, a Hindu line.  I'm fairly sure that it doesn't work like a final exam you must pass by demonstrating your knowledge of what events transpired long before you lived or characters in any ancient and mysterious and likely fradulent or perverted text were up to.  I doubt that God sits up there and says, you know you lived a great, moral, prosperous life, but you just didn't go to the right church and so sorry you can't get into Heaven, lol.  

  The point is that we need things like the Moral Majority to unify people of all faiths who do strive to be good and live a moral, ethical life.  We need to focus on what we all have in common, not what our particular churches have at odds.  If we do not, then things like what happened this year occur and we get weakened out of pettiness as people who are only further away from our values slide into power b/c guys who do represent our values got taken out by moot things that do not matter in deciding who would be the best leader of a secular office such as the Presidency.  

  October 22, 2008 2:57 PM

• Betsy Kachelmeier said:

  Romney was my pick from the beginning.  What I think is funny is that I had several friends and family members that voted for Huckabee because of the mormon issue, now they are saying that they wished they could turn back the hands of time!! Some have even commented that they wish it was a McCain/Romney ticket.  I do believe that Obama would not have had a chance with Mitt on the ticket, the man knows about money and that is one issue that we are all worried about. It could have played right into McCains favor. Too bad he led a lot of us on to think it was Mitt then at the last minute bring Palin in, what was he thinking? I will still vote for McCain, nothing could bring me to vote for Obama.

  October 22, 2008 5:44 PM

• Dan P. said:

  Come clean?  OMGROFL.  Ok, as long as we're asking members of other religions to come clean because they have other texts or scriptures they consider holy or whatever, I'd like to hear from the Jewish community to ask both Evangelicals and Mormons, all Christians no matter how differing their denominations may be over this or that, to come clean on their other text since the New Testament is an additional text on top of the Old Testament.  

  Explain to me, come clean, on how it is that God happened to create the universe, Earth, all life, then Man and gave us a set of rules and then changed his mind and gave us a brand new set, which totally happened to negate the first, original set of rules?  Like God's will was just wrong to begin with and he needed to get his act together on how he treated us.  This is why texts, scriptures, and sermons are all secondary to true, actual faith.  I'm not talking as a Deist like Brock, though I am probably aligned in that mindset very much, but I'm talking about being moral, religious people of any religion needing to understand that the words in the good book or books or other texts are all stories there to guide and relate to, not to take the place of or provide true faith.  

  Now, given that I'm skeptical enough to question the validity of the New Testament over the Old (especially when Jesus shares in his identity a backstory and other attributes similar to mythological features and the events of the Bible parallel those of a story that was told 1,000 years before it--Gilgamesh, the original epic), I'm equally willing to question why it's so absurd to think Jesus, or God, The Trinity, the Supreme Being...The Creator would rather establish his Earthen Headquarters in the Middle East when he could do it anyplace in America, lol.  

  So anyway, this Lutheran boy has his questions about his own religion that maybe you all can help me with.  And after we have this discussion, maybe some Jews can finally get us to all come clean on where this New Testament came from that just so happens to erase all the ethos and tenets established in their original Old Testament.  Then we can move onto to the Buddhists and ask of them how it is nature is so supreme, and while we're at it we'll ask the Hindus, What's with the sacred cow?

  October 22, 2008 8:57 PM

Leave a Comment