Mitt Romney doesn't want Tea Party Candidates

[THE MATRIX]

Article

Once -- and possibly future -- presidential candidate Mitt Romney is urging Tea Party members not to run as third party candidates.

Romney told Newsmax that running as a third party candidate would split the Republican Party -- a "divide and fall" strategy -- and would "hand over the country to Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and that would be very sad indeed."

[Leonardo]

The more political parties you have contending elections, the better represented your population will be before and after the election. Having such large, powerful Democratic and Republican parties has been the death of representative politics in the US.

[BlindMessiah]

The more political parties you have contending elections, the better represented your population will be before and after the election. Having such large, powerful Democratic and Republican parties has been the death of representative politics in the US.

Excellent post. Only thing you left out: Romney's a tool.

[preacherman76]

Of course he doesnt want a strong third party. His puppet bank masters might lose power. Whether its him or 0bama, the same agenda is on the table.

Edited March 16, 2010 by preacherman76

[Leonardo]

Excellent post. Only thing you left out: Romney's a tool.

Thanks, BlindMessiah. And I'll remember to mention that Romney is a tool in future posts I make referencing him!!

[Pseudo Intellectual]

He's right. A third party will simply split the vote and guarantee a Democratic victory. The tea party should be a movement to influence, reform and take back the Republican Party, which ironically means that Romney will have to leave the party.

[preacherman76]

He's right. A third party will simply split the vote and guarantee a Democratic victory. The tea party should be a movement to influence, reform and take back the Republican Party, which ironically means that Romney will have to leave the party.

If there were ever a time a third party might have a chance, its now.

[Fluffybunny]

The republicans are as corrupt as the democrats, if not more so. Anyone looking at the rapid decent of the country over the past few decades with an open mind can see it, but far too many are willing to take the same corruption, abuse, inaction, and silliness election after election assuming this (D) or ® will be different this time. They won't...they have had too many millions invested to them by very rich and powerful people to get them where they are that they owe favors too. Those favors get paid back every time many times over...

When the government leaders have made its primary concern keeping its particular party in power over the need of the constituents that voted them into power, then the system is broke. Our system is now fundamentally broken, and cannot fix the problems at hand in its current configuration. Both sides are two sides of the same coin, the same corrupt innefective coin.

I feel sad to see that there are still so many people out there that are so painfully addicted to one party or the other, so much so that they can no longer see the truth of the horrible actions that their own party commits regularly. With political blinders bolted in place, people point fingers across the aisle at mistakes and corruption, but never are able to see what their own side has been doing to add to the problem.

Without a major overhaul of our system, our country will destroy itself. Both sides of the aisle will be busy pointing fingers across the aisle while the country fall apart, too busy protecting their own interests to do a damn thing to fix the problems they face.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

What do you suggest? What is this "major overhaul" you speak of? All I see from the "Both parties are bad" types is nothing but whining and no suggestions.

[Karlis]

The republicans are as corrupt as the democrats, if not more so. Anyone looking at the rapid decent of the country over the past few decades with an open mind can see it, but far too many are willing to take the same corruption, abuse, inaction, and silliness election after election assuming this (D) or ® will be different this time. They won't...they have had too many millions invested to them by very rich and powerful people to get them where they are that they owe favors too. Those favors get paid back every time many times over...

When the government leaders have made its primary concern keeping its particular party in power over the need of the constituents that voted them into power, then the system is broke. Our system is now fundamentally broken, and cannot fix the problems at hand in its current configuration. Both sides are two sides of the same coin, the same corrupt innefective coin.

I feel sad to see that there are still so many people out there that are so painfully addicted to one party or the other, so much so that they can no longer see the truth of the horrible actions that their own party commits regularly. With political blinders bolted in place, people point fingers across the aisle at mistakes and corruption, but never are able to see what their own side has been doing to add to the problem.

Without a major overhaul of our system, our country will destroy itself. Both sides of the aisle will be busy pointing fingers across the aisle while the country fall apart, too busy protecting their own interests to do a damn thing to fix the problems they face.

I was under the impression that what you outline was one of the basic causes as to why "the tea party" emerged from the grass roots level.

Karlis

[ohio traveler]

If there were ever a time a third party might have a chance, its now.

Agreed. And this makes both parties nervous. ( Which it should )

[Fluffybunny]

What do you suggest? What is this "major overhaul" you speak of? All I see from the "Both parties are bad" types is nothing but whining and no suggestions.

whining?

Typical...and ironic

It is a lot of things that need to be done. More than I would care to write right now...but for starters;

For one, campaign reform that stops the deepest pockets from winning the race, something that levels the playing field so that the people with the good ideas AND integrity get the same exposure as everyone else and the overwhelming majority of news coverage doesn't end up going to people so beholden to their "contributors" that there is an instant assumption of Return on Investment. Right now it takes so many millions of dollars to run for any high level office that no one but the extremely rich or the extremely obliged have access to even try to run; hardly the "representative" government that the founding fathers had in mind. Be it a flat rate government provided fund to run for higher offices, or severe limitations on contributions there needs to be a limit. I think the last election for president ended up running over half a billion for contributions for the top two candidates; that is just insane.

Breaking the two party stranglehold is critical. The system is unable to move forward on anything as the mentality has become a focus on making the other side look bad at any cost... Every decision is made with the litmus test being "What is best for the party" rather than, "What is best for America". Campaign reform will help that. Term limits for all high offices is another. When the sniping in the senate and the congress is of the same caliber as the monotonous exchanges that occur in this forum, something is fundamentally wrong.

Term limits for all high level offices need to be put in place. It gets played with from time to time, but those that have the most to lose will always vote it down. Career politicians who know they depend on their future income from what they do and who they help leave themselves open to corruption, the longer they are there, the worse it gets. Time and time again we see the effects of absolute power over long periods of time. There needs to be new blood with integrity, who focuses on what is best for the country...that drive and integrity fades over time.

Stripping the current tax structure down and developing a fair tax that is easy to understand, and fairly administered.

Shifting the power that the federal government has taken upon itself back down to state level where it originally was. There are many federal agencies that need to either be consolidated, eliminated, or simply shifted to state control and funds. Too many billions are wasted on funding overpowered, inept and corrupt agencies that are already able to be dealt with on a state level.

Restructure the military and the many bases that are being kept up all over the world(at huge expense) in places that no longer benefit us.

These are all things I have said many times in many threads...so the "whining and no suggestion" is just an end result of your "blinders" being in place...thank you for proving the point.

Edited March 17, 2010 by Fluffybunny
speeling

[Siara]

His opinion is irrelevant. If enough people organize to launch a candidate, that candidate goes on the ballot.

[Fluffybunny]

His opinion is irrelevant. If enough people organize to launch a candidate, that candidate goes on the ballot.

I am not sure I understand your point.

Are you saying that the person that gets the 15000 signatures(or whatever the state requires) and then has no more cash is some how going to have a chance against a multi-billionaire who can afford to run campaign ads on tv 24/7, plus ads in all the magazines and newspapers...not to mention hire every single adviser,speech writer, artists for top notch ads, people to run feedback panels...coach, TV director, actors for commercials...

For me, everyone having the same amount of money to play with keeps it so that the message and the person gets focused on, rather than the team putting everything together.

[WoIverine]

Of course they don't want any other contenders, both major parties seldom agree, but when it comes to their respective power bases being "undermined" as I'm sure they'd say, neither want that, and both agree.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

whining?

Typical...and ironic

It is a lot of things that need to be done. More than I would care to write right now...but for starters;

For one, campaign reform that stops the deepest pockets from winning the race, something that levels the playing field so that the people with the good ideas AND integrity get the same exposure as everyone else and the overwhelming majority of news coverage doesn't end up going to people so beholden to their "contributors" that there is an instant assumption of Return on Investment. Right now it takes so many millions of dollars to run for any high level office that no one but the extremely rich or the extremely obliged have access to even try to run; hardly the "representative" government that the founding fathers had in mind. Be it a flat rate government provided fund to run for higher offices, or severe limitations on contributions there needs to be a limit. I think the last election for president ended up running over half a billion for contributions for the top two candidates; that is just insane.

Breaking the two party stranglehold is critical. The system is unable to move forward on anything as the mentality has become a focus on making the other side look bad at any cost... Every decision is made with the litmus test being "What is best for the party" rather than, "What is best for America". Campaign reform will help that. Term limits for all high offices is another. When the sniping in the senate and the congress is of the same caliber as the monotonous exchanges that occur in this forum, something is fundamentally wrong.

Term limits for all high level offices need to be put in place. It gets played with from time to time, but those that have the most to lose will always vote it down. Career politicians who know they depend on their future income from what they do and who they help leave themselves open to corruption, the longer they are there, the worse it gets. Time and time again we see the effects of absolute power over long periods of time. There needs to be new blood with integrity, who focuses on what is best for the country...that drive and integrity fades over time.

Stripping the current tax structure down and developing a fair tax that is easy to understand, and fairly administered.

Shifting the power that the federal government has taken upon itself back down to state level where it originally was. There are many federal agencies that need to either be consolidated, eliminated, or simply shifted to state control and funds. Too many billions are wasted on funding overpowered, inept and corrupt agencies that are already able to be dealt with on a state level.

Restructure the military and the many bases that are being kept up all over the world(at huge expense) in places that no longer benefit us.

I agree with most of what you're saying, especially on term limits and federal-state boundaries, but there are parts I don't agree with, such as closing down our bases abroad.

These are all things I have said many times in many threads...so the "whining and no suggestion" is just an end result of your "blinders" being in place...thank you for proving the point.

To be honest, I've never heard you say those things before.

[Pseudo Intellectual]

If there were ever a time a third party might have a chance, its now.

Witness the consequences of a third party, my friend:

Republican candidates have now stretched their lead over Democrats to 10 points in the Generic Congressional Ballot, their biggest lead ever in nearly three years of weekly tracking. The GOP has been leading on the ballot for months.

The new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 45% would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate while 35% would opt for his or her Democratic opponent. Voter support for GOP congressional candidates increased slightly from last week, while support for Democrats fell two points.

Republicans started 2010 ahead by nine points, while support for Democrats fell to its lowest level over the same period. Towards the end of 2009, GOP candidates enjoyed a more modest lead over Democrats, with the gap between the two down to four points in early December. Since the beginning of the year, however, the Republican lead hasn’t dipped below seven points.

But in a three-way generic ballot involving a Tea Party candidate, the Democratic candidate earns 34% support, while the Republican gets 27% of the vote with the Tea Party hopeful in third at 21%.

Edited March 17, 2010 by Pseudo Intellectual

[preacherman76]

Polls mean very little. Especialy this early in the game. Right now all people know to do (like lambs to the slaughter) is turn back to the only other party they believe exists. Wait till we can put some faces next to a third party. People arent souly dependent on TV to see who's out there any more.

Going back to the GOP is just asking for more of the same. A puppet for the banks.