Do you think he has a chance at becoming president, or even getting past the primaries? Do you want him to be president?
Besides the fact that he's a Mormon, what do you think of him?
I think he has a good balance of conservative and liberal views, and look at the way he handled the 2002 Winter Olympics! They didn't end up in the hole. I think he could handle the country well.
2007-04-13 04:57:29 · 17 answers · asked by red 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
He is a waffler, but show me a politician that isn't. He has some questions to answer (opinions past and present on abortion and gun rights) but I would love to see someone that has not been a life long politician get elected. The one thing that we do not need is another attorney in government. His chance of becoming president is remote because to get the nomination from the republicans you need the Evangelicals, and many of them are biased against Mormons because of half truths and lies that have been told about the religion. Many people had the same questions about JFK, so you never know, I think he would be better than anyone else running so far.
2007-04-13 05:05:16 · answer #1 · answered by blissdds 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
as I live and work in the event and staging industry in Boston. I have had the opportunity to hear mitt speak several times to many different audiences. some fund raisers for the republican party, some press conferences and addresses to chamber of commerce... and I will tell you this, he is a politician, with a head on his shoulders and can think on his feet. But he would never would have gotten elected here if he were pro life. he changed sides! why because being republican and pro choice just doesn't work on the national scene. just a politician can he be trusted? I don't think so.
2007-04-13 16:31:10 · answer #2 · answered by Josh B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think from what I hear on TV, he changes his positions to which ever way the wind is blowing. That may be an unfair evaluation because I haven't read enough about him. At the present Guliani is my preferance, and Mrs. Clinton is the last place candidate as she has had no experience running anything,eg: city, state, and certainly no experience responding to a major attack or serious emergency while being the CEO in command.
2007-04-13 12:09:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
From a financial standpoint, I'd have a lot of confidence in Romney that he'd do a good job. (i'm lib/dem mind you)
Regarding social issues, I'd rather not have a Mormon running the country. Course, I'd rather not have anyone religious running the country.
Conservative ideals were wonderful in the 50's, but they should have stayed in the 50's.
2007-04-13 12:01:46 · answer #4 · answered by ? 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I like him, but in case you haven't noticed, Nobody gets elected unless they are strongly opinionated and far to one side or the other. Booo!
The fact that he makes sense scores him no bonus points. Few people in this country will consider that in their vote. Instead, they vote on issues like: how they look, if they talk well, what color they are, if they seem nice, etc.
The fact that he's mormon will probably make him unelectable too.
Added note: OR people will vote for whoever is he was the chosen candidate for their party and shun the other candidate, no matter if they might make a great president... like the bonehead two spots beneath my message. Vote for people, not for a party. Neither party can be trusted. (btw, I'm not conservative)
2007-04-13 12:00:22 · answer #5 · answered by yodadoe 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I think he's an honest man, with great business sense and the most intelligent person running for president at the moment, by far.
He doesn't have a chance, because of the specific type of Christian he is. (Mormon)
It's too bad.
2007-04-13 12:04:05 · answer #6 · answered by Ricky T 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wishy washy.He changes his positions to fit the political climate of the day.Noone really knows what he actually stands for because his positions change so often.That would be a weakness going into the general electon.A more principaled candidate like McCain, despite his stance on the war, would most likely be better for the Republicans.
2007-04-13 12:03:03 · answer #7 · answered by grandmasvagina 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He's "got problems with the truth."
He had a fund raising meeting with people from his religion and they said, "Hey, you could add some of your own money."
He demured, saying, "I might if I have to."
Later it comes out that he had already given some of his own money, but he pretended not to have given it at the time.
He's clueless. His wife said they met in college when they were just poor students. She told the Boston Globe that they had only $80,000 in investments at the time. That's really poor!
He's a bully and tells lies when he thinks it will help him.
2007-04-13 12:15:02 · answer #8 · answered by brer 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not being cruel...but not much because it's the Hillary and Barack show and he's lost in the wake of their fame. I live in Illinois and know or have even heard for that matter much about him. I'd like to see some debates taking place instead of all the advertising they're doing.
2007-04-13 12:07:37 · answer #9 · answered by G=ME 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think he is most likely basicaly a good man. However, he has made some major changes over the years and appears to be trying to be trying to some degree to be the product he thinks a block of voters wants instead of the leader that the larger electorate will follow.
2007-04-13 12:01:22 · answer #10 · answered by toff 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋