Florida Shooters Network

Toss aside your ideological investments (subjectivity) for a moment and answer the question in a non-biased fashion (objectivity).

Further questions also to consider:

1. Is the contraception issue really that important to you?
2. Who offers a greater threat to Obama: Santorum or Romney? (neither is not an option)
3. Is the recent budget proposed by the Obama Administration nothing more than a political document? Justify your reasoning.
4. If Rick Santorum wins Michigan, should the other candidates pack it up and go home?
5. Considering the general consensus that the GOP field is weak, who would you offer as an alternative and why?

Edit: Title

Tom Fernandez wrote:1. Is the contraception issue really that important to you?

This question doesn't make any sense. Is it important to me in what way? No, I don't want a tired old religion telling me I cannot use contraceptives, nor telling my insurance company that they cannot pay for preventative health. Yes, I believe the government (federal and state) should generally allow religious orgs to run their own show.

Tom Fernandez wrote:2. Who offers a greater threat to Obama: Santorum or Romney? (neither is not an option)

Romney.

Tom Fernandez wrote:3. Is the recent budget proposed by the Obama Administration nothing more than a political document? Justify your reasoning.

All documents are political. Obama's budget is no more political than Paul Ryan's balanced budget plan.

Tom Fernandez wrote:4. If Rick Santorum wins Michigan, should the other candidates pack it up and go home?

Of course not. Nor should Santorum pack it up if Romney wins MI.

Tom Fernandez wrote:5. Considering the general consensus that the GOP field is weak, who would you offer as an alternative and why?

The problem is that the GOP has the candidates it wants. That they cannot win over independents and moderate republicans/democrats doesn't mean they are weak, just that the party's answers are not accepted by the majority of Americans.

Tom Fernandez wrote:1. Is the contraception issue really that important to you?

Personally, no. Idealogically, yes. As a public issue, telling religious organizations to violate some of their basic tenets violates their 1st amendment rights to practice their religions free from government intervention. Additionally, and what no one seems to be noticing, is that by "accomodating" religious organizations by allowing them not to provide for certain "female health services" the government is forcing the insurance companies to provide those services "free of charge" to those wanting them. But does anyone really believe the insurance companies are going to provide "free" services for anybody? Name one insurance company that does so. In effect, this is no more than a government takeover of the insurance industry, just like they took over part of the automotive industry and the banking industry. Obama and his people are not stupid but they certainly assume that the vast majority of the citizenry is.

Tom Fernandez wrote:Toss aside your ideological investments (subjectivity) for a moment and answer the question in a non-biased fashion (objectivity).



1. Is the contraception issue really that important to you?
2. Who offers a greater threat to Obama: Santorum or Romney? (neither is not an option)
3. Is the recent budget proposed by the Obama Administration nothing more than a political document? Justify your reasoning.
4. If Rick Santorum wins Michigan, should the other candidates pack it up and go home?
5. Considering the general consensus that the GOP field is weak, who would you offer as an alternative and why?

1. It's a liberty and principles issue. Do I think Santorum is going to magically ban condoms, birth control pills, and other contraceptives? No. But I do think that his general attitude is wrong-headed. It's fine to have beliefs I disagree with. It's not fine to try to shove them down mine or anyone else's throat from a position of power and act holier than thou. It's sad, too, because I agree with a lot of what he has to say about the importance of family and I'm an atheist.

2. Romney. He's got money and appeals to independents much more than Santorum does.

3. Of course it's political. There are no meaningful cuts whatsoever and he's continuing on an incredibly destructive path. The man is a hardcore leftist ideologue.

4. No.

5. I'd draft someone from outside politics. Most successful businessmen aren't insane enough to want to get involved in government, which is understandable. But if I had my way I'd force someone that didn't want to be there (who would most likely be dragged kicking and screaming) into the Oval Office for the good of the country. I can't really think of many names off the top of my head, although John T. Reed comes to mind.

g.willikers wrote:So, what do I win?

Just fostering good ole political conversation brother. But since you asked...

Contraception; To me not the issue, but telling any organization what must be included in a binding contract is NOT a federal government duty.
Obama v Romney or Obama v Santorum. Romney has a better financed campaign, but really Obama will get four more years.
I'm of the mind that all the budget wrangling is and has been political. This goes back to the DOA budget nonsense of the 80s, maybe even before that. Politicians do not do anything without politics in mind.
I wish that all of them would pack up and go home, but none of them should drop out because of a loss. As long as they have the money keep on campaigning.
I've got no idea.

While I admire Santorum's religious beliefs, I think he needs to concentrate
on the economy and jobs and leave the social stuff behind. He is alienating
a lot of women and 20-somethings that might otherwise, based on FISCAL
policy, vote Republican this time around.

Tom Fernandez wrote:Toss aside your ideological investments (subjectivity) for a moment and answer the question in a non-biased fashion (objectivity).

Further questions also to consider:

1. Is the contraception issue really that important to you?
2. Who offers a greater threat to Obama: Santorum or Romney? (neither is not an option)
3. Is the recent budget proposed by the Obama Administration nothing more than a political document? Justify your reasoning.
4. If Rick Santorum wins Michigan, should the other candidates pack it up and go home?
5. Considering the general consensus that the GOP field is weak, who would you offer as an alternative and why?

Edit: Title

1. Meh. It really depends WHAT we are talking about the Contraception issue. Should women(and men) have ample access to Birth Control? Yes. Should religious organizations be forced to pay for it? No. Do some of Santorum's personal beliefs on contraception scare me? Yes. As long as he doesn't try to force those personal beliefs on the rest of us, I dont care though.

2. Well, I always though Santorum was actually a better fit for some key swing states than Romney. Indiana, Ohio, Virginia, Missouri....and he maybe even able to bring PA into play, which would be huge....and could offset the fact that he would have very difficult time in Florida, which he would have a much more difficult time making red than Romney would. IDK, it is kind of a toss up for those reasons IMO. I forsee a possible Romney\Santorum ticket if Romney wins the nomination. *shrug*

3. I havent really looked at it in much detail. So I abstain from answering this question.

4. No. But it definitely will seriously hurt Romney's appearance. But no one is going anywhere until at least after Super Tuesday, and no one really should. After Super Tuesday? That depends on the results of Super Tuesday. So it is too early for me to accurately answer this question.

5. Oh my. Well, I still like Paul. :/ But, I have to face the reality that he is not gonna get the nod. I dont really know if there is a 'perfect' republican candidate for this year, with the way the Republican party base is revolting. It would have to be someone that is 'conservative enough' to really rally the base, but someone not tooo conservative to make all the independents run away. I think Paul could have been that, but his foreign policy positions were to 'outside' the neocon box and thus has been tarnished because of that. Romney could have been that, but it is becoming more apparent that he just is not really capable of rallying the base. Sarah Palin? No. Christie? Doubtful. Daniels? Maybe. Jeb Bush? His last name would make indies run. IDK. *shrug*

Jeb Bush? His last name would make indies run. IDK. *shrug*

You know, it's a damned shame he's associated with that family. I'd vote for him for president in a second, and I'm not a Republican. It's just tragic that his brother was president. Like when John Belushi died and we were left with Jim Belushi. Sad.

I just ran the math, and Obama can lose A LOT of states he won in 2008 and still win in 2012

He can lose

Virginia
North Carolina
New Mexico
Colorado
Nevada
Iowa
New Hampshire
The split in Nebraska
AND
Florida

And still have 271 electoral votes.

http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_p ... ?mapid=gPx

That is how stacked the deck is against the Republicans. And the above map could be a Romney\Obama general election. He still needs either Indiana or Ohio or some HUGE upset in Massachusetts.

A Santorum\Obama general election could look like this.

Santorum flipping the following states.

Colorado
Iowa
Indiana
Ohio
North Carolina
Virginia
AND
Pennsylvania.

http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_p ... ?mapid=gPz

Yes, he would HAVE TO take PA. or Florida. Either would be difficult or Santorum. PA probably easier than FL for him.

Cardboard_killer wrote:

Tom Fernandez wrote:1. Is the contraception issue really that important to you?

This question doesn't make any sense. Is it important to me in what way? No, I don't want a tired old religion telling me I cannot use contraceptives, nor telling my insurance company that they cannot pay for preventative health. Yes, I believe the government (federal and state) should generally allow religious orgs to run their own show.

Tom Fernandez wrote:2. Who offers a greater threat to Obama: Santorum or Romney? (neither is not an option)

Romney.

Tom Fernandez wrote:3. Is the recent budget proposed by the Obama Administration nothing more than a political document? Justify your reasoning.

All documents are political. Obama's budget is no more political than Paul Ryan's balanced budget plan.

Tom Fernandez wrote:4. If Rick Santorum wins Michigan, should the other candidates pack it up and go home?

Of course not. Nor should Santorum pack it up if Romney wins MI.

Tom Fernandez wrote:5. Considering the general consensus that the GOP field is weak, who would you offer as an alternative and why?

The problem is that the GOP has the candidates it wants. That they cannot win over independents and moderate republicans/democrats doesn't mean they are weak, just that the party's answers are not accepted by the majority of Americans.

What he said...

Tom Fernandez wrote:1. Is the contraception issue really that important to you?

It is but it is not the most important thing. I suspect that anti-contraception combined with anti-choice is a sign of insanity.

Tom Fernandez wrote:2. Who offers a greater threat to Obama: Santorum or Romney? (neither is not an option)

Romney. I don't believe that Romney will defeat Obama but I am fairly certain that Santorum won't.

Tom Fernandez wrote:3. Is the recent budget proposed by the Obama Administration nothing more than a political document? Justify your reasoning.

I can't say too much on this because I haven't analyzed it and I am not exactly qualified to analyze a federal budget anyway. But what I will say is that Obama is doing his job. You may or may not like how he is doing his job but he is. His job IS POLITICAL. The President of The United States of America can't do anything less private than taking a leak without it being political.

Tom Fernandez wrote:4. If Rick Santorum wins Michigan, should the other candidates pack it up and go home?

No, Santorum is evil. Evil must be opposed.

Tom Fernandez wrote:5. Considering the general consensus that the GOP field is weak, who would you offer as an alternative and why?

From the circle of people who have actually expressed a desire to win the Republican nomination what I would really like to do is cut out part of John Huntsman's brain and add it to Ron Paul's. Of course that is not possible. Out of the 4 people still running the only one I can say anything at all good about is Ron Paul who I voted for in the FL primary. I had some difficulty deciding between Ron Paul vs John Huntsman until Huntsman dropped out.

If you are talking about adding yet another candidate to the mix after several states have already voted I would be against it. Unless you find a candidate that half of the country will immediately stand up and cheer for and rally behind adding a new 5th choice now will only fracture the party even further. otoh, it might be a good thing if the Republican party split in two. Especially if one of them actually stands for small government (and don't even try to tell me that that is the Tea Party because if the split happens they are the one that will be the other one).

jaybird wrote:http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=gPx

Amazing site friend! Thank you!

Tom Fernandez wrote:

jaybird wrote:http://www.270towin.com/2012_election_predictions.php?mapid=gPx

Amazing site friend! Thank you!

Enjoy! For someone like you, that site is a real gem. It has so much info.

1. Is the contraception issue really that important to you?
no, but i do have an opinion,
If the gov has said preventative care is no cost to patients, I don't see why women should be excluded due to where they work.
what next, no more covered Colonoscopy's because catholic church says you can pray your colon polyps away?

2. Who offers a greater threat to Obama: Santorum or Romney? (neither is not an option)
well since neither is not an option, it doesn't matter. A true republican would oppose Romney and any Independent or Independent leaning republican will not vote for a religious nutjob like Santorum.

3. Is the recent budget proposed by the Obama Administration nothing more than a political document? Justify your reasoning.
haven't studied it, don't really care as it will be shot down anyways.

4. If Rick Santorum wins Michigan, should the other candidates pack it up and go home?
no, but it should be a public black eye for Romney.

5. Considering the general consensus that the GOP field is weak, who would you offer as an alternative and why?
well it was said to keep your answers non-biased but i am biased toward one of the 4 standing. (Ron Paul). but as someone stated i was leaning towards a John Huntman back up, but that didn't last. so i think Gary Johnson might get the vote.

Romney seems to be staging somewhat of a comeback in Michigan, based on the most recent polls. I think people realize that Santorum would be an utter disaster in the fall--the guy is incapable of avoiding being portrayed as a priggish moralist hellbent on running people's private lives, mainly because he is a priggish moralist hellbent on running other people's private lives.

tector wrote:Romney seems to be staging somewhat of a comeback in Michigan, based on the most recent polls. I think people realize that Santorum would be an utter disaster in the fall--the guy is incapable of avoiding being portrayed as a priggish moralist hellbent on running people's private lives, mainly because he is a priggish moralist hellbent on running other people's private lives.

Well, I saw that too. But it does not appear to be because of a loss of support for Santorum in Michigan.

The poll shows a gain in support for Romney that does not correspond with a dip for Santorum, who still leads among evangelicals, self-described "very conservative" voters, men, union members and Tea Party supporters. Romney's support has grown among women, moderates, seniors and "somewhat conservative" voters.

http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf ... oll_n.html

But an Interesting article on the topic of Michigan, and national politics in general in the Internet age....

http://swampland.time.com/2012/02/20/th ... -national/ <<It is something to think about.

No, he isn't losing his support--it is just that everybody else is waking up to what disaster he will be. I used to think that if Gingrich dropped out almost all of his support would go to Santorum. Now I am not so sure.