Mitt Romney Files FEC Paperwork To Run In 2016 Election

[droit]

Mitt Romney, like most of America, does not believe Donald Trump should be the next President of the United States. While his logic in this matter is spot-on, it may be for very different reasons than he claims. Mitt Romney has filed paperwork with FEC to run in the current election and may be trying to block out Trump so he does not get the Republican nomination.

‘Romney gave a heated speech regarding why he believes that Trump is not fit to be president and urged voters to back anyone but Trump. The former presidential candidate, who infamously lost to Barack Obama in 2012, refused to endorse a particular candidate, but instead told voters to vote for whichever candidate had the best chance of beating Trump in each individual state. For example, Romney suggests voting for Rubio in Florida, John Kasich in Ohio, and for Ted Cruz or whichever one of the other two contenders has the best chance of beating Mr. Trump in the given state.’


http://bipartisanreport.com/2016/03/07/mitt-romney-files-fec-paperwork-to-run-in-2016-election/

[Gelston]

Romney would do even worse than Trump against Hilary.

[time4fun]

I actually don't think so. Trump is 100% a losing candidate. Romney actually has a chance, but I am not sure how he could pull this off without causing a GOP civil war.

[Kembal]

the GOP will implode if Trump doesn't get the nomination by any method other than another candidate getting a majority of pledged delegates. Romney somehow stealing the nomination would hand either Democratic candidate the WH for 4 years.

[GS4Pirate]

I actually don't think so. Trump is 100% a losing candidate. Romney actually has a chance, but I am not sure how he could pull this off without causing a GOP civil war.

It's funny how out of touch you are.

[Warriorbird]

There is no way in hell that Romney wins the nomination.

[time4fun]

It's funny how out of touch you are.

Fortunately I've got a member of PC's angry white male brigade to come show me the way. If I'm really lucky, maybe you'll launch into one of your classic diatribes on the proper use of a uterus.

[time4fun]

There is no way in hell that Romney wins the nomination.

I actually don't think he's trying to.

I think he's trying to take enough votes away from Trump to keep him from winning.

[Warriorbird]

I actually don't think he's trying to.

I think he's trying to take enough votes away from Trump to keep him from winning.

I don't think he even has enough cred with Republicans to do that.

[time4fun]

I don't think he even has enough cred with Republicans to do that.

Yeah, it's hard to see how he would appeal to the same base. It's also possible he's gambling on a contested convention, or the mythical brokered convention. But, again, I don't know how he could get the nomination without causing a civil war in the GOP.

[Parkbandit]

I actually don't think so. Trump is 100% a losing candidate. Romney actually has a chance, but I am not sure how he could pull this off without causing a GOP civil war.

This has been said about Trump since he first entered.

[GS4Pirate]

Fortunately I've got a member of PC's angry white male brigade to come show me the way. If I'm really lucky, maybe you'll launch into one of your classic diatribes on the proper use of a uterus.

No need for that, when we can just continue to let you explain how this is OK, yet be the party of "compassion":

7793

[Latrinsorm]

This has been said about Trump since he first entered.And has he ever gotten ahead of Hilary in head to head polling?

[time4fun]

That's true, but Trump's deficits with favorability cause serious problems for a general election scenario.

First, his net unfavorability is higher than anyone else in the running right now. Even among Republican voters, he's got middling favorability at best. And if you dig deeper, what's going on is a plurality of GOP voters love him, and the rest despise him. That makes the likelihood of a high GOP turnout during election day relatively lower than usual. He's definitely pulled a lot of new people into the GOP primary process for sure, but there's not much evidence that these people are new to voting- just new to primaries. He's going to need to show that he's pulling in a crap ton of new voters to make up for the number of traditional GOP voters who're going to have a hard time feeling inspired to turnout.

His -24 favorability with independents makes the pool of potential voters he can pull from even smaller.

But the real problem is his favorability with Dems. -70. And, just like with GOP voters, Dems don't just kind of dislike him. Democrats *hate* him. Even though dems have shown a fair amount of ambivalence in the primary process between Hilary and Bernie, a Trump nomination will be enough to bring them out in droves. Dems already tend to have strong turnouts in Presidential election years, and those who might otherwise have felt less than compelled to show up to vote FOR the Democratic nominee are going to race to the polls to vote AGAINST Trump.

That's why the GOP Establishment is losing their shit right now. It's not even about the White House- which they know is a hell of a stretch at best no matter who the candidate is. It's the Senate. Trump won't just lose the White House, he'll flip the Senate. It's why good ol' Mitch has already told the GOP Senators who are defending their seats that they're allowed to run against Trump. There are 8 who are in really precarious situations right now, and the Dems only need to flip 5.

[time4fun]

No need for that, when we can just continue to let you explain how this is OK, yet be the party of "compassion":

7793

You do realize that's not even remotely accurate as an abortion picture, right?

Try these: http://clinicquotes.com/abortion-at-6-weeks/

There's this thing called science. If you need to hide it to make your points, your points shouldn't be made.

[GS4Pirate]

You do realize that's not even remotely accurate as an abortion picture, right?

Try these: http://clinicquotes.com/abortion-at-6-weeks/

There's this thing called science. If you need to hide it to make your points, your points shouldn't be made.

No, what is it then? Why is it ok? You must support men being able to just walk away then as long as the mass of cells has not passed the meat curtains.

7794

[Gelston]

I actually don't think so. Trump is 100% a losing candidate. Romney actually has a chance, but I am not sure how he could pull this off without causing a GOP civil war.

Trump won't win. I agree. Romney would do worse.

[Parkbandit]

That's true, but Trump's deficits with favorability cause serious problems for a general election scenario.

First, his net unfavorability is higher than anyone else in the running right now. Even among Republican voters, he's got middling favorability at best. And if you dig deeper, what's going on is a plurality of GOP voters love him, and the rest despise him. That makes the likelihood of a high GOP turnout during election day relatively lower than usual. He's definitely pulled a lot of new people into the GOP primary process for sure, but there's not much evidence that these people are new to voting- just new to primaries. He's going to need to show that he's pulling in a crap ton of new voters to make up for the number of traditional GOP voters who're going to have a hard time feeling inspired to turnout.

His -24 favorability with independents makes the pool of potential voters he can pull from even smaller.

But the real problem is his favorability with Dems. -70. And, just like with GOP voters, Dems don't just kind of dislike him. Democrats *hate* him. Even though dems have shown a fair amount of ambivalence in the primary process between Hilary and Bernie, a Trump nomination will be enough to bring them out in droves. Dems already tend to have strong turnouts in Presidential election years, and those who might otherwise have felt less than compelled to show up to vote FOR the Democratic nominee are going to race to the polls to vote AGAINST Trump.

That's why the GOP Establishment is losing their shit right now. It's not even about the White House- which they know is a hell of a stretch at best no matter who the candidate is. It's the Senate. Trump won't just lose the White House, he'll flip the Senate. It's why good ol' Mitch has already told the GOP Senators who are defending their seats that they're allowed to run against Trump. There are 8 who are in really precarious situations right now, and the Dems only need to flip 5.

H-I-L-L-A-R-Y

[drauz]

No, what is it then? Why is it ok? You must support men being able to just walk away then as long as the mass of cells has not passed the meat curtains.

7794

If they didn't want the kid from the start then yes, they should be able to walk away and have no financial requirements for the child. He should also give up all parental rights to the kid if he does that.

[GS4Pirate]

If they didn't want the kid from the start then yes, they should be able to walk away and have no financial requirements for the child. He should also give up all parental rights to the kid if he does that.

And good luck with that, will never happen (nor should we be able to). Only women are allowed to shrug responsibility, this is equality.

[Parkbandit]

If they didn't want the kid from the start then yes, they should be able to walk away and have no financial requirements for the child. He should also give up all parental rights to the kid if he does that.

lolwut?

So, what you are saying is: It's the woman's fault for getting herself all knocked up.

Fantastic.

[drauz]

lolwut?

So, what you are saying is: It's the woman's fault for getting herself all knocked up.

Fantastic.

LOL, you can't be this dumb.

[Parkbandit]

LOL, you can't be this dumb.

Why don't you break this quote down for us dumb people then:


If they didn't want the kid from the start then yes, they should be able to walk away and have no financial requirements for the child. He should also give up all parental rights to the kid if he does that.

[Gelston]

If they didn't want the kid from the start then yes, they should be able to walk away and have no financial requirements for the child. He should also give up all parental rights to the kid if he does that.

If they didn't want the kid from the start they shouldn't have had sex. Once they did and a kid was made, it is the man's and the woman's responsibility to care for that kid.

[GS4Pirate]

If they didn't want the kid from the start they shouldn't have had sex. Once they did and a kid was made, it is the man's and the woman's responsibility to care for that kid.

Or at least take the time to drop the child off at your nearest hospital, where they will take the child with no questions asked.

FFS, did we just crawl out of the caves or are we trying our best to crawl back to them.

[drauz]

Why don't you break this quote down for us dumb people then:

Sure, I'll break it down for you.

I don't think that a woman should have complete control over if a child is born or not. I'm not "blaming the mother". I am saying the father should have an equal voice. So if he doesn't want the kid (and I'm not talking about month 8 of the pregnancy) he shouldn't be forced into having to support a kid he doesn't want. If he wants an abortion and she doesn't then I do believe that she should be solely responsible for that child, but have the man's parental rights over the child are taken forever.

[Wrathbringer]

Sure, I'll break it down for you.

I don't think that a woman should have complete control over if a child is born or not. I'm not "blaming the mother". I am saying the father should have an equal voice. So if he doesn't want the kid (and I'm not talking about month 8 of the pregnancy) he shouldn't be forced into having to support a kid he doesn't want. If he wants an abortion and she doesn't then I do believe that she should be solely responsible for that child, but have the man's parental rights over the child are taken forever.

omg LOL


I actually don't think so. Trump is 100% a losing candidate. Romney actually has a chance, but I am not sure how he could pull this off without causing a GOP civil war.

/clowns

[Wrathbringer]

Fortunately I've got a member of PC's angry white male brigade to come show me the way. If I'm really lucky, maybe you'll launch into one of your classic diatribes on the proper use of a uterus.

Ah, I see you're a racist. Me too. Not only am I white, but I specifically employ only blacks so I can pretend I'm a slave owner.

[Gelston]

Ah, I see you're a racist. Me too. Not only am I white, but I specifically employ only blacks so I can pretend I'm a slave owner.

This made me laugh for all the wrong reasons.

[Warriorbird]

Ah, I see you're a racist. Me too. Not only am I white, but I specifically employ only blacks so I can pretend I'm a slave owner.

Hipster racism so edgy!

http://www.autostraddle.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/gavin-explains-it-all-640x403.jpg

[ClydeR]

And has he ever gotten ahead of Hilary in head to head polling?

General election polls have little predictive value during the primaries. People like to talk about them, but you should not rely on them. You can Google it if you want to reinforce how trustworthy I am.

[Wrathbringer]

Hey, Warriorbird, want a job?

[Latrinsorm]

H-I-L-L-A-R-YIn terms of favorability...
Hillary is -10 overall, Trump is -23.
Hillary is 19% unfavorable for Democrats (+59), Trump is 32% unfavorable for Republicans (+33).
20% of Democrats say they definitely wouldn't support Hillary in November, 35% of Republicans say they definitely wouldn't support Trump.

They're not close to the same.

[Warriorbird]

Hey, Warriorbird, want a job?

Sure! Right around the time you 1. become an actual employer 2. stop somehow impersonating Tucker Carlson and David Duke at the same time.