Who should be america's president

[Ozserf]

EFFACÉ

[ace199212]

Chuck Norris,

everybod know him, he is famous, everybody like him, he could win,
from the other hand is that he will not know what to do as president xD

[techgump]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okMLlHkOy4Y

[furqi]

exactly, people need to realize that 9/11 was a response and act of frustration, not a initial attack due to religion and hatred of freedom

[Ozserf]

EFFACÉ

[Vortex_Master]

Did u read his signature? LOL

This was one of the first topics I posted on... I was so immature back then. LOL

MITT ROMNEY!

[Drone6o3]

But he's a Mormon, don't they believe in the devil?
(Sarcasm, do not think I'm that stupid.)
( + I am a Mormon so..... lol... If anybody wants I'll explain why people think Mormons are Devil Worshipers, & how that rumor got started)

[furqi]

just wondering, whats your reason to vote for mitt romney, and although I don't mean to insult you, do you think it would be fair if somehow america had over 50 percent Muslim and all those Muslims only voted for Muslim candidates who want shariah law? Instead of trying to support your religion,ethnicity, and so on, why not support all human kind by picking who you truly think is the best candidate.

if you have political reason to vote for mitt romney, then go for it, but basing voting of something like religion won't always work as it will lead america to downfall as more people like santorum who will be even more extreme will have a bigger chance of winning

you have to realize that mitt romney is currently one of the most inconsistent man in the presidential race.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpmg0hrX4io
watch like the first two minutes of that video

[Drone6o3]

1: I Can't vote yet
2: He's a better choice than Obama
3: His Beliefs are well balanced when it come to political issues such as marriage and abortions.

[Ratburntro44]

You know, a truly good candidate would not base anything he does off of anything he believes; he should base it off of the constituents. If he supports whatever the people support at that time, not what he supports, that is a good thing; the perfect politician would be the one who does what the people want, not says what they wants and forces the people to lose on certain things.

For example, let's say we have 4 issues:

Issue 1: 75% for
Issue 2: 80% for
Issue 3: 65% against
Issue 4: 80% for

We have two candidates.

Issue 1: A for, B against
Issue 2: A against, B for
Issue 3: A against, B for
Issue for: A for, B against

Most likely, A will win; he agrees with the majority on 3/4 issues, while B does on 1/4. However, with normal politics, that would mean the people lose on Issue 2. The perfect politician, candidate C, rather than acting at all on what he is in favor of, will vote for whatever his constituents tell him they want. He should win on every issue. He is the best.

Now, Mitt Romney is certainly not this perfect candidate; but he is certainly much more like that than Ron Paul.

P.S. Why is compromise a swear word in politics? Compromises are supposed to be good.