Whether the people really voted for a change or many people did not vote because it was a non-presidental election..what is done is done..now we start to turn to the 2008 Election...Mitt Romney out of Massachutes has a good chance and my reasoning is this..even though he is Repubican Governor..his state is majority Democrat party....he governs with the law and does not push his personal/religous views...for if he had then Massachusets would not been able to pass Pro-gay laws...
2006-11-13 04:01:21 · 6 answers · asked by sosickiam 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I think Romney is a great choice. He has done amazing things fiscally and with regard to health coverage, and he has been able to do so with a 85% Democrat congress. He has been successful with everything he's touched basically. There was mention that he didn't fess up or something about ancestors being polygamists...what is that about. Who would care about someone's ancestors 150 years ago? Obviously the same people that attack politicians for personal matters rather than look at the issues and how someone would represent them and their agenda. As to his "Mormon" beliefs, it shouldn't lose him the evangelicals, because his morals and his positions on the issues that matter to evangelicals are in line. If they were to oppose someone because of their religion alone it would be ignorant and prejudiced. Massachusets is 55% Catholic and they elected Romney the governer. He has been supported by evangelicals in his state. Again, people shouldn't look at someones religion, but their morals and positions. We have had evangelicals, Catholics, Baptists, etc. and it was never a problem.
As to him having a say in Massachusetts passing pro-gay laws, he really didn't have any hand in that, it was primarily the courts.
2006-11-14 10:01:50 · answer #1 · answered by straightup 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Mitt Romney *opposes* pro-gay laws, and has said so publicly. The same-sex marriage prohibition was declared unconstitutional by the state supreme court, Romney had no choice in the matter and would clearly outlaw it if he had the votes to do so in the state legislature.
I would have a very hard time ever voting for a Mormon for president. Do you know that the Mormon church has a long-held belief that there will come a "time of crisis" for the US government, that the government will "hang by a thread," and that a Mormon leader will take charge and run the country by Mormon principles? It's a "prophecy" of Joseph Smith, it's founder (who once ran for president himself).
Haven't we had enough of religious nuts running the white house over the past 6 years without bringing on a worse one? How about we abide by the constitution and leave religion out of government?
2006-11-13 04:06:41 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Mr Romney didn't pass any pro-gay laws they were pushed by the courts and a legislature that overrides his veto's. The real damning thing for Romney is that he won't get past the evangelist that rule the primaries in the republican party. Mr. Romney is a MORMON!!!!. The evangelicals think of him as a member of some twisted sect so he is doomed.
2006-11-13 07:24:48 · answer #3 · answered by brian L 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Romney is a wimp, a lightweight. He didn't even want to admit in an interview that his ancestors were polygamists. Give me a break!
2006-11-13 04:03:51 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
As a citizen of MA I can tell you he is as callous and as phony as they come. Even a lot of Republicans say so.
2006-11-13 04:13:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
if mccain chooses to run then hes got it in my view.
2006-11-13 04:03:03 · answer #6 · answered by David B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋