Take this test to see who your Rep candidate should be

[connieb]

I got Huntsman as first too. Then Paul then Obama. None were very convicing precentages though. I think the Obama one was because of my picks on Afghanastan and Immigration.

connie

 

[Jen]

Romney has leadership qualities that Obama doesn't possess. The Obama administration has gotten plenty done. I give the credit to Nancy Pelosi..........Obama pretty much voted "present" the whole way through. Once Nancy was gone, Obama's "present" vote didn't count for anything and he didn't realize that a real leader goes into the lion's den, negotiates and comes out with a good deal. Obama made public speeches mocking and yelling at Republicans for not obeying him. A good leader never does that kind of crap. And it didn't work well when Obama did it. He's no leader.

I am not crazy about Romney at all. But I do believe he understands how to lead and right now, that would be a huge improvement. That's why I will hold my nose and vote for him if he is the GOP nomination.

Perhaps I missed it. To recap, you said Romney might be a liberal...but you didn't care because he was a "leader" and you bemoaned the fact that the President "didn't get anything done" (odd, given he's accused of "enacting a vast socialist agenda"...but no matter).

So it seems strange you, a person right-of-Center, would want to swap a liberal who will "get things done" (i.e. their liberal agenda)....for a person you consider a liberal who does NOT "get things done"....which would be LESS liberalism.

So why would you want MORE liberalism, Jen?!?!?

 

[GordonGecko]

Jen, again, doesn't answer my question....you noted that Romney "may be a liberal"....but would TAKE him for President because he'd be a "leader".

Okay where would a LIBERAL ...lead us? To more liberalism, right?

 

[Alinvegas]

If enough people that like Gingrich, vote for Gingrich, he could win...